EVE Search - Sticky:[Summer 2014] Jump Drive Isotope Consumption

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Summer 2014] Jump Drive Isotope Consumption

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9769	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:27:00 - [1] - Quote Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. We will also be increasing the fuel bays on all jump capable ships (and the fuel storage on starbase jump bridge arrays) by 50% (60% for Black Ops Battleships) so that they do not need to refuel more often. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:29:00 - [2] - Quote Interesting, quite the first hike at 50% Also: first
Antoine Jordan SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation 103	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:33:00 - [3] - Quote Are you doing anything for carriers, who often carry a large part of their fuel in their corporate hangar, or is it intended that they won't be able to go as far without refueling after this change?
iskflakes 908	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:33:00 - [4] - Quote Supercapitals which have to store fuel in their fleet hangars because their fuel bays are too limited will get hit pretty hard by this. -
WarFireV Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 342	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:33:00 - [5] - Quote Rip dreads.
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 738	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:34:00 - [6] - Quote Jesus no Stop it .
Eno Ishikela Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:35:00 - [7] - Quote Thanks for nerfing small alliances.
Khador Vess Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 187	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:35:00 - [8] - Quote Can we get a corresponding cargo bay tweak for BLOPS as well please because one fuel bay aint enough and the extra 10% still puts blops at a disadvantage. I used to have a forum sig, but CCP SocksFour stole it....
iskflakes 908	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:35:00 - [9] - Quote WarFireV wrote: Rip dreads. Apart from the increased price they benefit from this, they will just get more stront for equivalent jump distance. -
Blodhgarm Dethahal Transcendent Sedition Dustm3n 107	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:36:00 - [10] - Quote I think I may buy a few Isotopes.. -Bl+¦d http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space.
Lephia DeGrande Luxembourg Space Union 349	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:36:00 - [11] - Quote Isnt that change harming smaller corps while big corps care as much much as they do now? Only for the sake of higher income for Ice producer/minier? Support Comet Mining!
David Magnus 296	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:36:00 - [12] - Quote Antoine Jordan wrote: Are you doing anything for carriers, who often carry a large part of their fuel in their corporate hangar, or is it intended that they won't be able to go as far without refueling after this change? This is a great question. http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/fight-us-maybe http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/winterupdate http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/supercaps http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/pandemiclegion
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 31	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:38:00 - [13] - Quote Eno Ishikela wrote: Thanks for nerfing small alliances. I DONT CARE CUS IM NOT A POOR LOLOL
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 444	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:38:00 - [14] - Quote Just WTF?!
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1351	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:39:00 - [15] - Quote brb, buying ice GRRR Goons
Tubrug1 Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:39:00 - [16] - Quote So you're not tackling the real issue involving jump drives which is power projection? Writer of The Eve Onion http://eveion.blogspot.co.uk/ I have a Twitter
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:39:00 - [17] - Quote Can you double the base amount of liquid ozone consumption for lighting a cyno
Powers Sa 1063	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:40:00 - [18] - Quote 50% ?? Could you please review a possible blops bonus on fuel consupmtion? This will really change how I do a monthly long floating (in space) deployment. lol
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 31	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:40:00 - [19] - Quote Tubrug1 wrote: So you're not tackling the real issue involving jump drives which is power projection? I wish you'd tackle the real issue of being in a non-existent alliance l0l
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 594	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:40:00 - [20] - Quote Here's a crazy thought... Remove all the jump fuel from Hisec. If all the jump fuel had to be sourced from 0.0 and lowsec, and the different racial variants were only found in specific regions... the space you control would directly determine which racial jump drives you could fuel and therefore what capital ships you could field. That would undoubtedly cause utter chaos and a massive uproar so you might have to introduce some sort of "generic" jump fuel that can be found everywhere, but has a lower efficiency e.g. you need more of it to make the same jump. Fleet Bookmarks New Gravimetric Sites Med Clones 2.0
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 31	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:41:00 - [21] - Quote penifSMASH wrote: Can you double the base amount of liquid ozone consumption for lighting a cyno reduce all frigate cargoholds by 200% to compensate
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 450	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:41:00 - [22] - Quote Interesting change. Probably the most interesting part is the echo effect in Jump Freighters -- it's going to increase the costs for people building (slash living) in nullsec due to their reliance on said. I'm assuming that was intentional. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:41:00 - [23] - Quote Will you be increasing the size of fleet hangars, since that's where most fuel is kept? What about increasing the cargo size of black ops? Many people use cargo-expanded and rigged Black Ops to bridge around covert fleets and most of the fuel for that is kept in the cargo.
Lloyd Roses Blue-Fire 565	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:42:00 - [24] - Quote penifSMASH wrote: Can you double the base amount of liquid ozone consumption for lighting a cyno Pretty please. "I honestly thought I was in lowsec" Moving pictures
ForceM POS Builder Inc. Silent Requiem 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:43:00 - [25] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! We will also be increasing the fuel bays on all jump capable ships (and the fuel storage on starbase jump bridge arrays) by 50% (60% for Black Ops Battleships) so that they do not need to refuel much more often.[/b] WTF!!! You got no idea how annoyingly small the fuel bay of a black ops is and your nerfing it with a total of 20% now. This is ****** up tbh. That measly 10% over the rest is just shy an ounce of an insult. Your tweet about starting a controversy is correct .... no beer or you. ForceM
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:43:00 - [26] - Quote Swiftstrike1 wrote: Here's a crazy thought... Remove all the jump fuel from Hisec. If all the jump fuel had to be sourced from 0.0 and lowsec, and the different racial variants were only found in specific regions... the space you control would directly determine which racial jump drives you could fuel and therefore what capital ships you could field. That would undoubtedly cause utter chaos and a massive uproar so you might have to introduce some sort of "generic" jump fuel that can be found everywhere, but has a lower efficiency e.g. you need more of it to make the same jump. Here's a crazy thought... stop making bad suggestions?
Alekseyev Karrde Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group 1440	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:44:00 - [27] - Quote RIP affordable T2 heh "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart." -Arydanika, Voices from the Void Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com
Peter Powers Terrorists of Dimensions Free 2 Play 225	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:44:00 - [28] - Quote let me update your list a bit CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. screw over everyone producing in lowsec, as prices are even less competative to highsec than before due to the raising transport cost of resources to low, and produced goods to highsec, as well as the higher costs of transporting fuel etc. CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. Translation: The huge rich alliances get a minor nerf to their fleets that they probably care less about, while lesser rich entities, (small capital heavy corps, jumpfreighter services, roaming blackops gangs) get the shortstick... 3rdPartyEve.net - your catalogue for 3rd party applications
Akrasjel Lanate Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate 1519	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:45:00 - [29] - Quote Cool, but not sure cost changes will do much
Sphit Ker Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 200	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:45:00 - [30] - Quote oh dear. Now we need to have fuel bay expander rigs, or much larger fuel bays to start with. Until then, o7 to your bridge Widow and Sin.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:46:00 - [31] - Quote Cost for bridges should go up by more like 500%
Resgo Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 27	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:47:00 - [32] - Quote Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size.
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 7132	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:49:00 - [33] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. This is a great solution: I would use this instead. Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Irregessa Obfuscation and Reflections 103	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:49:00 - [34] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. Good thing there isn't something like a large coalition that controls all non-NPC nullsec from which nitrogen and oxygen isotopes are mined.
Loretta Calif Repercussus RAZOR Alliance 4	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:49:00 - [35] - Quote Stop ***** with so many portions of the game at once. Have you learned NOTHING from your past horrible failures at 'balance' passes? Adjust a few things and see what shakes out. You're nerfing the ** out of jump drive ships based on the slight possibility that there might maybe possibly be an issue. Have you ever considered waiting to see if that situation arises? Then adjusting accordingly? Rather than going balls deep straight out of the gate? Stop treating us like 2 bit whores. We need a little foreplay before you jam the nerf bat up there.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 451	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [36] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. This is a pretty good solution for keeping blackops battleships from being adversely affected by the change. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [37] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Cost for bridges should go up by more like 500% I wish you'd stop posting
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1351	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [38] - Quote this is okay for dreads, carriers, supers, titans it sucks for jump freighters. don't do this while you are in the process of making null and low industry more viable GRRR Goons
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 92	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 451	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [40] - Quote Irregessa wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. Good thing there isn't something like a large coalition that controls all non-NPC nullsec from which nitrogen and oxygen isotopes are mined. Oxygen Isotopes can also come from the Drone Regions. It's a big part of the reason why oxytopes are in the crapper right now compared to nitropes. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Beaver Retriever Reality Sequence 213	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:50:00 - [41] - Quote So this will be a minor annoyance for the logistics departments of large alliances and coalitions such as the CFC and PL, while it will be both a massive pain in the ass and a not insignificant cost increase in running caps for smaller alliances. Yeah, there weren't few enough people risking capitals as it was. Nice change.
Vtra The Scope Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:51:00 - [42] - Quote Are you going to Double my Covert haulers bays as well to compensate? This is ********, why don't you make ice refine half as much then instead of screwing over the people who actually risk ships for pvp. Little safe highsec miner still gets his money and we have to pay double for the same service..... well thought out CCP.
Tubrug1 Zebra Corp Gentlemen's Agreement 472	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:51:00 - [43] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Tubrug1 wrote: So you're not tackling the real issue involving jump drives which is power projection? I wish you'd tackle the real issue of being in a non-existent alliance l0l Stalin pls ((( Writer of The Eve Onion http://eveion.blogspot.co.uk/ I have a Twitter
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1141	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:51:00 - [44] - Quote What?! Do you have any idea of how much small (or newbies :D) alliances rely on jump freighting services when moving their stuff? To take a typical situation in Brave, when moving our staging, a fresh newbie with 2/3 cruisers and a bunch of T1 frigates will die horribly to gate camps if trying to move his stuff himself, so he will use a jump freighting service. Its already barely affortable for some individuals, do you imagine how this increase in cost would affect them? Logistics are already an horrible pain because the contract system is broken, because nullsec requires stupidly high amounts of human effort due to poor sov design, and now to add insult to injury, you try to make people that are new enough to the game that then can't move their stuff themselves... pay more to have their stuff moved? CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. Cost competitiveness for local ressource gathering in nullsec? How do in fuel my Rhea and Widow in Catch? Its amarr space, isotopes are useless for my ships out there, how can null-sec caldari ice belts be any "local" for me? Do you expect me to train all the way to Amarr Battleship V, Amarr Freighter IV, and buy an Amarr Jump freighter?? Sorry but this is one of the worst changes I've seen in this upcoming release and I hope you reconsider it. Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
iskflakes 910	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:52:00 - [45] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. This is a good solution. +50% usage -1/3rd volume -
FT Diomedes The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:52:00 - [46] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. This is a good suggestion. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 293	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:52:00 - [47] - Quote 0.o...... The Law is a point of View
Zetaomega333 HIFI INDUSTRIAL The Kadeshi 68	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:53:00 - [48] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. We will also be increasing the fuel bays on all jump capable ships (and the fuel storage on starbase jump bridge arrays) by 50% (60% for Black Ops Battleships) so that they do not need to refuel much more often. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Can we get say nullsec ice belts doubled in size then because atm a decent sized mining fleet will clear it in 45 minutes
Angelus X Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:53:00 - [49] - Quote This is a great change, thanks raivi ))) <3
MrWalter White Breaking Bad Corp 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:53:00 - [50] - Quote pls increase the fuel bay size and the CHA size to compensate for this - so we can make the same amount of jumps
Schmata Bastanold Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo 1635	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:53:00 - [51] - Quote Hehehehe, space draaamaaa! I am not my skills but... http://eveboard.com/pilot/Schmata_Bastanold

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9776	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:53:00 - [52] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [53] - Quote To explain further - atm the cost to bridge around a 100man bc fleet is about the same as the ammo carried by one of those bcs. Its hilariously cheap. Its cheaper to bridge a jf than to jump it. Make bridges have a minimum mass/ship (for cost calculations, not the bridging), and massively amp up the cost.
gr ant Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 37	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [54] - Quote This game sure seems like its going to be a lot of fun, can't wait for you guys to iron out all the kinks and get ready for full release
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [55] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 +1
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 741	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [56] - Quote Tubrug1 wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Tubrug1 wrote: So you're not tackling the real issue involving jump drives which is power projection? I wish you'd tackle the real issue of being in a non-existent alliance l0l Stalin pls ((( Its ok Tub, my shoulder is here 4 u to cry on .
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [57] - Quote what about the (rather huge) nerf to blops that use their cargo for extra fuel? same with dreads? same with carriers and fleet hangars? could you instead of changing fuel bay size consider reducing fuel size by 33% edit: nvm literally everyone else already said the same thing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 215	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [58] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:54:00 - [59] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. Cutting isotope volume allows people to fit more fuel into non-fuel bays, which you may or may not want to do.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [60] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: To explain further - atm the cost to bridge around a 100man bc fleet is about the same as the ammo carried by one of those bcs. Its hilariously cheap. Its cheaper to bridge a jf than to jump it. Make bridges have a minimum mass/ship (for cost calculations, not the bridging), and massively amp up the cost. STOP POSTING SO BADLY PLS FREND
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [61] - Quote "Duplicate the cost and see what happens" Lol, that is not a well thought plan, or at least, it doesn't seem to be. You want to make the fuel more competitive? Then buff a lot the profitability of mining in lowsec or 0.0. This change will impact more on the small guy that can't afford his own capitals or supers and has to rely in the local market in low/0.0. With the fuel increased in price, you just kill the competitiveness. The little guy that is pissed because of the markup on contracts in 0.0, the newbro, basically. Alliances are still going to be able to afford capital operations, bridges, etc. If you want to nerf power projection and want to see supers in field more often because battles like B-R are good for your business then start rebalancing those hulls to make them more useful and survivable without having a supercapital blob behind if **** hits the fan.
gr ant Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [62] - Quote well shitt
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 383	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [63] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 what is the new jump cost if the old one is 270
Destoya Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 263	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [64] - Quote Help I'm being repressed
David Magnus 296	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [65] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. This is a great solution! http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/fight-us-maybe http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/winterupdate http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/supercaps http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/pandemiclegion
Casey AtThe Bat Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:55:00 - [66] - Quote Any reason why certain regions of space will continue to have to import ice/topes from halfway across the galaxy whereas drones can get all flavors within a few jumps? Nerf Drone space
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:56:00 - [67] - Quote I wish these announcements wouldnt be made when my ass is stuck at work. Can things that are massively going to affect the market be issued at random times as opposed to the same time most of the time (i.e. EU working hours). I realise I'm asking for "work" out of hours for you folks, but to be fair - it is a forum post
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:56:00 - [68] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. Cutting isotope volume allows people to fit more fuel into non-fuel bays, which you may or may not want to do. more fuel but same range as current aka exactly what ccp want https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution Nullsec Ninjas 279	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:56:00 - [69] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. We will also be increasing the fuel bays on all jump capable ships (and the fuel storage on starbase jump bridge arrays) by 50% (60% for Black Ops Battleships) so that they do not need to refuel much more often. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Doesn't go nearly far enough. Don't Panic.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:57:00 - [70] - Quote Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349....
Buhhdust Princess Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 8267	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:57:00 - [71] - Quote Didn't think of POS fuel.. Wow, i thought you might have come up with an intelligent idea.
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 94	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:57:00 - [72] - Quote penifSMASH wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 what is the new jump cost if the old one is 270 405
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:57:00 - [73] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
gr ant Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:57:00 - [74] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 sucks to be a poor
Resgo Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 28	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:58:00 - [75] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. Though if you'd like to increase the size of the fuel bay on top of it, it'd be much appreciated. My fleet hangar always seems to be full of fuel due to the fuel bay being undersized to begin with.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 13:59:00 - [76] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Michael Harari wrote: To explain further - atm the cost to bridge around a 100man bc fleet is about the same as the ammo carried by one of those bcs. Its hilariously cheap. Its cheaper to bridge a jf than to jump it. Make bridges have a minimum mass/ship (for cost calculations, not the bridging), and massively amp up the cost. STOP POSTING SO BADLY PLS FREND http://evemaps.dotlan.net/jump/Avatar,544,B:Hurricane=100/Oddelulf:B-VIP9
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 215	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [77] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227...
Grarr Dexx Snuff Box 373	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [78] - Quote What's the next change? "We will disband any alliance below 500 members for being irrelevant"?
Nartel Vortok Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 52	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [79] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 Thanks
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [80] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. If you cut the amount of fuel then we will bring more fuelers with us. This won't work. It is the same thing as if you capped the amount of ships that can jump through a bridge. You put more cynos, more bridges, whatever. Linear nerfs are not going to work, because they are trivial to circunvent by simply adding more ships to the equation, and this means that you are nerfing the small guy.
iskflakes 910	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [81] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 Fozzie can you include a table like this in the OP? -
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:00:00 - [82] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227...

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9781	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:01:00 - [83] - Quote We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

iskflakes 910	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:02:00 - [84] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 -
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 94	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:03:00 - [85] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:03:00 - [86] - Quote i wish you'd stop trying to apply band-aid fixes to power projection and address the actual issues tho https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
KiithSoban Big Johnson's Red Coat Conspiracy 43	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:03:00 - [87] - Quote Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. I want to see logi appear on killmails! (by just repping)-á See CSM "reasonable things"
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 33	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:03:00 - [88] - Quote I can't like threads :(
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 741	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:03:00 - [89] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Do you actually think things through before you post or what .
Destoya Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 263	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:04:00 - [90] - Quote Migui X'hyrrn wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. If you cut the amount of fuel then we will bring more fuelers with us. This won't work. It is the same thing as if you capped the amount of ships that can jump through a bridge. You put more cynos, more bridges, whatever. Linear nerfs are not going to work, because they are trivial to circunvent by simply adding more ships to the equation, and this means that you are nerfing the small guy. Read what he wrote, it's just intended to increase the cost of jumping capital ships (as well as the demand for isotopes), not decrease jump range or require more fuelers.
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 215	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:04:00 - [91] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Wait, I'm lost again...
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [92] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Thanks for clarifying, you are a good man. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [93] - Quote BadAssMcKill wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Do you actually think things through before you post or what reported https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
Tarsas Phage Freight Club 279	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [94] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 451	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [95] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Antoine Jordan SUNDERING Goonswarm Federation 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [96] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. hooray for fast fixes!
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:05:00 - [97] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Thanks for clarifying, you are a good man. yea pretty straightforward now thx https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 383	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:06:00 - [98] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: penifSMASH wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 what is the new jump cost if the old one is 270 405 thanks
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 471	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:06:00 - [99] - Quote Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) isotopes aren't liquid ozone you dumb GOON https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 218	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:06:00 - [100] - Quote Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) Liquid ozone isn't isotopes
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:06:00 - [101] - Quote Tarsas Phage wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Alizandro Goderaski Evolution Northern Coalition. 25	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:07:00 - [102] - Quote Grarr Dexx wrote: What's the next change? "We will disband any alliance below 500 members for being irrelevant"? Lol grarr, shut the **** up.
handige harrie Hedion University Amarr Empire 232	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:07:00 - [103] - Quote Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) I don't think they count LO3 as isotope, just as an Ice product Baddest poster ever
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:07:00 - [104] - Quote Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) I refuse to believe you manage to dress yourself in the morning
Angelus X Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:08:00 - [105] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Thanks for clarifying, you are a good man. This makes a lot more sense now +rep
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 452	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:08:00 - [106] - Quote Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) isotopes aren't liquid ozone you dumb GOON Uh, yeah, but he said they aren't increasing bay sizes any more. I'm saying still do it for the Jump Bridge. Gosh. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 218	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:09:00 - [107] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Can someone tell me what these would be if they increased them further to 75% as Fozzie alluded to doing in the OP?
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:09:00 - [108] - Quote Destoya wrote: Read what he wrote, it's just intended to increase the cost of jumping capital ships (as well as the demand for isotopes), not decrease jump range or require more fuelers. If you need more fuel to cover the same distance you need more fuelers. This idea is dumb because it follows the same reasoning as "Hey, if we duplicate the taxes, we will duplicate the money that we get from taxes". What happens in reality? You kill the competitiveness. Hits harder to the small guy, etc. I don't care if a bridge/jump costs X or 2X or X/2. If I have ships with jump drive it means that I can afford the cost. The problem is for the newbro that is going to find much harder to live in 0.0 because everything will be much more expensive.
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 305	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:09:00 - [109] - Quote Peter Powers wrote: Translation: The huge rich alliances get a minor nerf to their fleets that they probably care less about, while lesser rich entities, (small capital heavy corps, jumpfreighter services, roaming blackops gangs) get the shortstick... This is how pretty much every change ever works out.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 452	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:09:00 - [110] - Quote I know it's cool to viciously attack any perceived flaw in game mechanics knowledge to prove your worth to the herd and all but you should probably actually read what's being said before frothing at the mouth. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Cultural Enrichment Jenkem Puffing Association 26	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:10:00 - [111] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. What makes you think you can recognize a good idea when you keep having such ****** ones?
Capqu Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 473	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:10:00 - [112] - Quote Querns wrote: Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) isotopes aren't liquid ozone you dumb GOON Uh, yeah, but he said they aren't increasing bay sizes any more. I'm saying still do it for the Jump Bridge. Gosh. how should i know how jump bridges work u took our fuckin sov https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNpMiT5qpyI
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:10:00 - [113] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 2...
Ltd SpacePig Exclusion Cartel The Kadeshi 19	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:10:00 - [114] - Quote Wow.. this is gonna affect the smaller alliance a lot more then the ones i think that CCP wants to affect by this change. This change is not to buff the ice market btw.. this is a change to nerf the power projection in EVE and CCP is to coward to say out laud so they push it into the industry changes Why not work with the underlying reason for the power projection problem instead off taking the easy way out and change a number in a table? The bigger alliances will adapt and this will have no change in the way we operate while the smaller alliance will get a hard time.
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 95	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:11:00 - [115] - Quote KiithSoban wrote: Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. tbh, it's more of a power projection buff as poor alliances like BL and their ilk will be less inclined to be able to defray the cost of sending their cap fleet more than 3 jumps. I've a table to illustrate what it would cost a fleet of 50 dreads to deploy (in millions): 50 dreads (old)50 dreads (new) 280420 300450 320480 340510 360540 380570 400600 420630 440660 460690 480720 500750 520780 540810 560840 580870 600900 620930 640960 660990 6801020 7001050 7201080 7401110 7601140 7801170 8001200 8201230 8401260 8601290 8801320 9001350 9201380 9401410 9601440 9801470 10001500 10201530 10401560 10601590 10801620 11001650 11201680 11401710 11601740 11801770 12001800 12201830 12401860 12601890 12801920 13001950 13201980 13402010 13602040 13802070 14002100 14202130 14402160 14602190 14802220 15002250 15202280 15402310 15602340 15802370 16002400 16202430 16402460 16602490 16802520 17002550 17202580 17402610 17602640 17802670 18002700 18202730 18402760 18602790 18802820 19002850 19202880 19402910 19602940 19802970 20003000 20203030 20403060 20603090 20803120 21003150 21203180 21403210 21603240 21803270 22003300 22203330 22403360 22603390 22803420 23003450 23203480 23403510 23603540 23803570 24003600 24203630 24403660 24603690 24803720 25003750 25203780 25403810 25603840 25803870 26003900 26203930 26403960 26603990 26804020 27004050 27204080 27404110 27604140 27804170 28004200 28204230 28404260 28604290 28804320 29004350 29204380 29404410 29604440 29804470 30004500 30204530 30404560 30604590 30804620 31004650 31204680 31404710 31604740 31804770 32004800 32204830 32404860 32604890 32804920 33004950 33204980 33405010 33605040 33805070 34005100 34205130 34405160 34605190 34805220 35005250 35205280 35405310 35605340 35805370 36005400 36205430 36405460 36605490 36805520 37005550 37205580 37405610 37605640 37805670 38005700 38205730 38405760 38605790 38805820 39005850 39205880 39405910 39605940 39805970 40006000 40206030 40406060 40606090 40806120 41006150 41206180 41406210 41606240 41806270 42006300 42206330 42406360 42606390 42806420 43006450 43206480 43406510 43606540 43806570 44006600 44206630 44406660 44606690 44806720 45006750 45206780 45406810 45606840 45806870 46006900 46206930 46406960 46606990 46807020 47007050 47207080 47407110 47607140 47807170 48007200 48207230 48407260 48607290 48807320 49007350 49207380 49407410 49607440 49807470 50007500 50207530 50407560 50607590 50807620 51007650 51207680 51407710 51607740 51807770 52007800 52207830 52407860 52607890 52807920 53007950 53207980 53408010 53608040 53808070 54008100 54208130 54408160 54608190 54808220 55008250 55208280 55408310 55608340 55808370 56008400 56208430 56408460 56608490 56808520 57008550 57208580 57408610 57608640 57808670 58008700 58208730 58408760 58608790 58808820 59008850 59208880 59408910 59608940 59808970 60009000 60209030 60409060 60609090 60809120 61009150 61209180 61409210 61609240 61809270 62009300 62209330 62409360 62609390 62809420 63009450 63209480 63409510 63609540 63809570 64009600 64209630 64409660 64609690 64809720 65009750 65209780 65409810 65609840 65809870 66009900 66209930 66409960 66609990 668010020 670010050 672010080 674010110 676010140 678010170 680010200 682010230 684010260 686010290 688010320 690010350 692010380 694010410 696010440 698010470 700010500 702010530 704010560 706010590 708010620 710010650 712010680 714010710 716010740 718010770 720010800 722010830 724010860 726010890 728010920 730010950 732010980 734011010 736011040 738011070 740011100 742011130 744011160 746011190 748011220 750011250 752011280 754011310 756011340 758011370 760011400 762011430 764011460 766011490 768011520 770011550 772011580 774011610 776011640 778011670 780011700 782011730 784011760 786011790 788011820 790011850 792011880 794011910 796011940 798011970 800012000 802012030 804012060 806012090 808012120 810012150 812012180 814012210 816012240 818012270 820012300 822012330 824012360 826012390 828012420 830012450 832012480 834012510 836012540 838012570 840012600 842012630 844012660 846012690 848012720 850012750 852012780 854012810 856012840 858012870 860012900 862012930 864012960 866012990 868013020 870013050 872013080 874013110 876013140 878013170 880013200 882013230 884013260 886013290 888013320 890013350 892013380 894013410 896013440 898013470 900013500 902013530 904013560 906013590 908013620 910013650 912013680 914013710 916013740 918013770 920013800 922013830 924013860 926013890 928013920 930013950 932013980 934014010 936014040 938014070 940014100 942014130 944014160...
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 452	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:12:00 - [116] - Quote Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) isotopes aren't liquid ozone you dumb GOON Uh, yeah, but he said they aren't increasing bay sizes any more. I'm saying still do it for the Jump Bridge. Gosh. how should i know how jump bridges work u took our fuckin sov Did not. LAWN did. I'm still sore about that too -- they nationalized a bunch of moons I was mining in the that renter pocket under your noses. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:12:00 - [117] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: KiithSoban wrote: Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. tbh, it's more of a power projection buff as poor alliances like BL and their ilk will be less inclined to be able to defray the cost of sending their cap fleet more than 3 jumps. I've a table to illustrate what it would cost a fleet of 50 dreads to deploy (in millions): 50 dreads (old)50 dreads (new) 280420 300450 320480 340510 360540 380570 400600 420630 440660 460690 480720 500750 520780 540810 560840 580870 600900 620930 640960 660990 6801020 7001050 7201080 7401110 7601140 7801170 8001200 8201230 8401260 8601290 8801320 9001350 9201380 9401410 9601440 9801470 10001500 10201530 10401560 10601590 10801620 11001650 11201680 11401710 11601740 11801770 12001800 12201830 12401860 12601890 12801920 13001950 13201980 13402010 13602040 13802070 14002100 14202130 14402160 14602190 14802220 15002250 15202280 15402310 15602340 15802370 16002400 16202430 16402460 16602490 16802520 17002550 17202580 17402610 17602640 17802670 18002700 18202730 18402760 18602790 18802820 19002850 19202880 19402910 19602940 19802970 20003000 20203030 20403060 20603090 20803120 21003150 21203180 21403210 21603240 21803270 22003300 22203330 22403360 22603390 22803420 23003450 23203480 23403510 23603540 23803570 24003600 24203630 24403660 24603690 24803720 25003750 25203780 25403810 25603840 25803870 26003900 26203930 26403960 26603990 26804020 27004050 27204080 27404110 27604140 27804170 28004200 28204230 28404260 28604290 28804320 29004350 29204380 29404410 29604440 29804470 30004500 30204530 30404560 30604590 30804620 31004650 31204680 31404710 31604740 31804770 32004800 32204830 32404860 32604890 32804920 33004950 33204980 33405010 33605040 33805070 34005100 34205130 34405160 34605190 34805220 35005250 35205280 35405310 35605340 35805370 36005400 36205430 36405460 36605490 36805520 37005550 37205580 37405610 37605640 37805670 38005700 38205730 38405760 38605790 38805820 39005850 39205880 39405910 39605940 39805970 40006000 40206030 40406060 40606090 40806120 41006150 41206180 41406210 41606240 41806270 42006300 42206330 42406360 42606390 42806420 43006450 43206480 43406510 43606540 43806570 44006600 44206630 44406660 44606690 44806720 45006750 45206780 45406810 45606840 45806870 46006900 46206930 46406960 46606990 46807020 47007050 47207080 47407110 47607140 47807170 48007200 48207230 48407260 48607290 48807320 49007350 49207380 49407410 49607440 49807470 50007500 50207530 50407560 50607590 50807620 51007650 51207680 51407710 51607740 51807770 52007800 52207830 52407860 52607890 52807920 53007950 53207980 53408010 53608040 53808070 54008100 54208130 54408160 54608190 54808220 55008250 55208280 55408310 55608340 55808370 56008400 56208430 56408460 56608490 56808520 57008550 57208580 57408610 57608640 57808670 58008700 58208730 58408760 58608790 58808820 59008850 59208880 59408910 59608940 59808970 60009000 60209030 60409060 60609090 60809120 61009150 61209180 61409210 61609240 61809270 62009300 62209330 62409360 62609390 62809420 63009450 63209480 63409510 63609540 63809570 64009600 64209630 64409660 64609690 64809720 65009750 65209780 65409810 65609840 65809870 66009900 66209930 66409960 66609990 668010020 670010050 672010080 674010110 676010140 678010170 680010200 682010230 684010260 686010290 688010320 690010350 692010380 694010410 696010440 698010470 700010500 702010530 704010560 706010590 708010620 710010650 712010680 714010710 716010740 718010770 720010800 722010830 724010860 726010890 728010920 730010950 732010980 734011010 736011040 738011070 740011100 742011130 744011160 746011190 748011220 750011250 752011280 754011310 756011340 758011370 760011400 762011430 764011460 766011490 768011520 770011550 772011580 774011610 776011640 778011670 780011700 782011730 784011760 786011790 788011820 790011850 792011880 794011910 796011940 798011970 800012000 802012030 804012060 806012090 808012120 810012150 812012180 814012210 816012240 818012270 820012300 822012330 824012360 826012390 828012420 830012450 832012480 834012510 836012540 838012570 840012600 842012630 844012660 846012690 848012720 850012750 852012780 854012810 856012840 858012870 860012900 862012930 864012960 866012990 868013020 870013050 872013080 874013110 876013140 878013170 880013200 882013230 884013260 886013290 888013320 890013350 892013380 894013410 896013440 898013470 900013500 902013530 904013560 906013590 908013620 910013650 912013680 914013710 916013740 918013770 920013800 922013830 924013860 926013890 928013920 930013950 932013980 934014010 93...
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:13:00 - [118] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: KiithSoban wrote: Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. tbh, it's more of a power projection buff as poor alliances like BL and their ilk will be less inclined to be able to defray the cost of sending their cap fleet more than 3 jumps. I've a table to illustrate what it would cost a fleet of 50 dreads to deploy (in millions): 50 dreads (old)50 dreads (new) 280420 300450 320480 340510 360540 380570 400600 420630 440660 460690 480720 500750 520780 540810 560840 580870 600900 620930 640960 660990 6801020 7001050 7201080 7401110 7601140 7801170 8001200 8201230 8401260 8601290 8801320 9001350 9201380 9401410 9601440 9801470 10001500 10201530 10401560 10601590 10801620 11001650 11201680 11401710 11601740 11801770 12001800 12201830 12401860 12601890 12801920 13001950 13201980 13402010 13602040 13802070 14002100 14202130 14402160 14602190 14802220 15002250 15202280 15402310 15602340 15802370 16002400 16202430 16402460 16602490 16802520 17002550 17202580 17402610 17602640 17802670 18002700 18202730 18402760 18602790 18802820 19002850 19202880 19402910 19602940 19802970 20003000 20203030 20403060 20603090 20803120 21003150 21203180 21403210 21603240 21803270 22003300 22203330 22403360 22603390 22803420 23003450 23203480 23403510 23603540 23803570 24003600 24203630 24403660 24603690 24803720 25003750 25203780 25403810 25603840 25803870 26003900 26203930 26403960 26603990 26804020 27004050 27204080 27404110 27604140 27804170 28004200 28204230 28404260 28604290 28804320 29004350 29204380 29404410 29604440 29804470 30004500 30204530 30404560 30604590 30804620 31004650 31204680 31404710 31604740 31804770 32004800 32204830 32404860 32604890 32804920 33004950 33204980 33405010 33605040 33805070 34005100 34205130 34405160 34605190 34805220 35005250 35205280 35405310 35605340 35805370 36005400 36205430 36405460 36605490 36805520 37005550 37205580 37405610 37605640 37805670 38005700 38205730 38405760 38605790 38805820 39005850 39205880 39405910 39605940 39805970 40006000 40206030 40406060 40606090 40806120 41006150 41206180 41406210 41606240 41806270 42006300 42206330 42406360 42606390 42806420 43006450 43206480 43406510 43606540 43806570 44006600 44206630 44406660 44606690 44806720 45006750 45206780 45406810 45606840 45806870 46006900 46206930 46406960 46606990 46807020 47007050 47207080 47407110 47607140 47807170 48007200 48207230 48407260 48607290 48807320 49007350 49207380 49407410 49607440 49807470 50007500 50207530 50407560 50607590 50807620 51007650 51207680 51407710 51607740 51807770 52007800 52207830 52407860 52607890 52807920 53007950 53207980 53408010 53608040 53808070 54008100 54208130 54408160 54608190 54808220 55008250 55208280 55408310 55608340 55808370 56008400 56208430 56408460 56608490 56808520 57008550 57208580 57408610 57608640 57808670 58008700 58208730 58408760 58608790 58808820 59008850 59208880 59408910 59608940 59808970 60009000 60209030 60409060 60609090 60809120 61009150 61209180 61409210 61609240 61809270 62009300 62209330 62409360 62609390 62809420 63009450 63209480 63409510 63609540 63809570 64009600 64209630 64409660 64609690 64809720 65009750 65209780 65409810 65609840 65809870 66009900 66209930 66409960 66609990 668010020 670010050 672010080 674010110 676010140 678010170 680010200 682010230 684010260 686010290 688010320 690010350 692010380 694010410 696010440 698010470 700010500 702010530 704010560 706010590 708010620 710010650 712010680 714010710 716010740 718010770 720010800 722010830 724010860 726010890 728010920 730010950 732010980 734011010 736011040 738011070 740011100 742011130 744011160 746011190 748011220 750011250 752011280 754011310 756011340 758011370 760011400 762011430 764011460 766011490 768011520 770011550 772011580 774011610 776011640 778011670 780011700 782011730 784011760 786011790 788011820 790011850 792011880 794011910 796011940 798011970 800012000 802012030 804012060 806012090 808012120 810012150 812012180 814012210 816012240 818012270 820012300 822012330 824012360 826012390 828012420 830012450 832012480 834012510 836012540 838012570 840012600 842012630 844012660 846012690 848012720 850012750 852012780 854012810 856012840 858012870 860012900 862012930 864012960 866012990 868013020 870013050 872013080 874013110 876013140 878013170 880013200 882013230 884013260 886013290 888013320 890013350 892013380 894013410 896013440 898013470 900013500 902013530 904013560 906013590 908013620 910013650 912013680 914013710 916013740 918013770 920013800 922013830 924013860 926013890 928013920 930013950 932013980 934014010 93...
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:13:00 - [119] - Quote 11.5ISK 23ISK 34.5ISK 46ISK 57.5ISK 69ISK 710.5ISK 812ISK 913.5ISK 1015ISK 1116.5ISK 1218ISK 1319.5ISK 1421ISK 1522.5ISK 1624ISK 1725.5ISK 1827ISK 1928.5ISK 2030ISK 2131.5ISK 2233ISK 2334.5ISK 2436ISK 2537.5ISK 2639ISK 2740.5ISK 2842ISK 2943.5ISK 3045ISK 3146.5ISK 3248ISK 3349.5ISK 3451ISK 3552.5ISK 3654ISK 3755.5ISK 3857ISK 3958.5ISK 4060ISK 4161.5ISK 4263ISK 4364.5ISK 4466ISK 4567.5ISK 4669ISK 4770.5ISK 4872ISK 4973.5ISK 5075ISK 5176.5ISK 5278ISK 5379.5ISK 5481ISK 5582.5ISK 5684ISK 5785.5ISK 5887ISK 5988.5ISK 6090ISK 6191.5ISK 6293ISK 6394.5ISK 6496ISK 6597.5ISK 6699ISK 67100.5ISK 68102ISK 69103.5ISK 70105ISK 71106.5ISK 72108ISK 73109.5ISK 74111ISK 75112.5ISK 76114ISK 77115.5ISK 78117ISK 79118.5ISK 80120ISK 81121.5ISK 82123ISK 83124.5ISK 84126ISK 85127.5ISK 86129ISK 87130.5ISK 88132ISK 89133.5ISK 90135ISK 91136.5ISK 92138ISK 93139.5ISK 94141ISK 95142.5ISK 96144ISK 97145.5ISK 98147ISK 99148.5ISK 100150ISK 101151.5ISK 102153ISK 103154.5ISK 104156ISK 105157.5ISK 106159ISK 107160.5ISK 108162ISK 109163.5ISK 110165ISK 111166.5ISK 112168ISK 113169.5ISK 114171ISK 115172.5ISK 116174ISK 117175.5ISK 118177ISK 119178.5ISK 120180ISK 121181.5ISK 122183ISK 123184.5ISK 124186ISK 125187.5ISK 126189ISK 127190.5ISK 128192ISK 129193.5ISK 130195ISK 131196.5ISK 132198ISK 133199.5ISK 134201ISK 135202.5ISK 136204ISK 137205.5ISK 138207ISK 139208.5ISK 140210ISK 141211.5ISK 142213ISK 143214.5ISK 144216ISK 145217.5ISK 146219ISK 147220.5ISK 148222ISK 149223.5ISK 150225ISK 151226.5ISK 152228ISK 153229.5ISK 154231ISK 155232.5ISK 156234ISK 157235.5ISK 158237ISK 159238.5ISK 160240ISK 161241.5ISK 162243ISK 163244.5ISK 164246ISK 165247.5ISK 166249ISK 167250.5ISK 168252ISK 169253.5ISK 170255ISK 171256.5ISK 172258ISK 173259.5ISK 174261ISK 175262.5ISK 176264ISK 177265.5ISK 178267ISK 179268.5ISK 180270ISK 181271.5ISK 182273ISK 183274.5ISK 184276ISK 185277.5ISK 186279ISK 187280.5ISK 188282ISK 189283.5ISK 190285ISK 191286.5ISK 192288ISK 193289.5ISK 194291ISK 195292.5ISK 196294ISK 197295.5ISK 198297ISK 199298.5ISK 200300ISK 201301.5ISK 202303ISK 203304.5ISK 204306ISK 205307.5ISK 206309ISK 207310.5ISK 208312ISK 209313.5ISK 210315ISK 211316.5ISK 212318ISK 213319.5ISK 214321ISK 215322.5ISK 216324ISK 217325.5ISK 218327ISK 219328.5ISK 220330ISK 221331.5ISK 222333ISK 223334.5ISK 224336ISK 225337.5ISK 226339ISK 227340.5ISK 228342ISK 229343.5ISK 230345ISK 231346.5ISK 232348ISK 233349.5ISK 234351ISK 235352.5ISK 236354ISK 237355.5ISK 238357ISK 239358.5ISK 240360ISK 241361.5ISK 242363ISK 243364.5ISK 244366ISK 245367.5ISK 246369ISK 247370.5ISK 248372ISK 249373.5ISK 250375ISK 251376.5ISK 252378ISK 253379.5ISK 254381ISK 255382.5ISK 256384ISK 257385.5ISK 258387ISK 259388.5ISK 260390ISK 261391.5ISK 262393ISK 263394.5ISK 264396ISK 265397.5ISK 266399ISK 267400.5ISK 268402ISK 269403.5ISK 270405ISK 271406.5ISK 272408ISK 273409.5ISK 274411ISK 275412.5ISK 276414ISK 277415.5ISK 278417ISK 279418.5ISK 280420ISK 281421.5ISK 282423ISK 283424.5ISK 284426ISK 285427.5ISK 286429ISK 287430.5ISK 288432ISK 289433.5ISK 290435ISK 291436.5ISK 292438ISK 293439.5ISK 294441ISK 295442.5ISK 296444ISK 297445.5ISK 298447ISK 299448.5ISK 300450ISK 301451.5ISK 302453ISK 303454.5ISK 304456ISK 305457.5ISK 306459ISK 307460.5ISK 308462ISK 309463.5ISK 310465ISK 311466.5ISK 312468ISK 313469.5ISK 314471ISK 315472.5ISK 316474ISK 317475.5ISK 318477ISK 319478.5ISK 320480ISK 321481.5ISK 322483ISK 323484.5ISK 324486ISK 325487.5ISK 326489ISK 327490.5ISK 328492ISK 329493.5ISK 330495ISK 331496.5ISK 332498ISK 333499.5ISK 334501ISK 335502.5ISK 336504ISK 337505.5ISK 338507ISK 339508.5ISK 340510ISK 341511.5ISK 342513ISK 343514.5ISK 344516ISK 345517.5ISK 346519ISK 347520.5ISK 348522ISK 349523.5ISK 350525ISK 351526.5ISK 352528ISK 353529.5ISK 354531ISK 355532.5ISK 356534ISK 357535.5ISK 358537ISK 359538.5ISK 360540ISK 361541.5ISK 362543ISK 363544.5ISK 364546ISK 365547.5ISK 366549ISK 367550.5ISK 368552ISK 369553.5ISK 370555ISK 371556.5ISK 372558ISK 373559.5ISK 374561ISK 375562.5ISK 376564ISK 377565.5ISK 378567ISK 379568.5ISK 380570ISK 381571.5ISK 382573ISK 383574.5ISK 384576ISK 385577.5ISK 386579ISK 387580.5ISK 388582ISK 389583.5ISK 390585ISK 391586.5ISK 392588ISK 393589.5ISK 394591ISK 395592.5ISK 396594ISK 397595.5ISK 398597ISK 399598.5ISK 400600ISK 401601.5ISK 402603ISK 403604.5ISK 404606ISK 405607.5ISK 406609ISK 407610.5ISK 408612ISK 409613.5ISK 410615ISK 411616.5ISK 412618ISK 413619.5ISK 414621ISK 415622.5ISK 416624ISK 417625.5ISK 418627ISK 419628.5ISK 420630ISK 421631.5ISK 422633ISK 423634.5ISK 424636ISK 425637.5ISK 426639ISK 427640.5ISK 428642ISK 429643.5ISK 430645ISK 431646.5ISK 432648ISK 433649.5ISK 434651ISK 435652.5ISK 436654ISK 437655.5ISK 438657ISK 439658.5ISK 440660ISK Converted to ISK https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 384	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:14:00 - [120] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: KiithSoban wrote: Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. tbh, it's more of a power projection buff as poor alliances like BL and their ilk will be less inclined to be able to defray the cost of sending their cap fleet more than 3 jumps. I've a table to illustrate what it would cost a fleet of 50 dreads to deploy (in millions): 50 dreads (old)50 dreads (new) 280420 300450 320480 340510 360540 380570 400600 420630 440660 460690 480720 500750 520780 540810 560840 580870 600900 620930 640960 660990 6801020 7001050 7201080 7401110 7601140 7801170 8001200 8201230 8401260 8601290 8801320 9001350 9201380 9401410 9601440 9801470 10001500 10201530 10401560 10601590 10801620 11001650 11201680 11401710 11601740 11801770 12001800 12201830 12401860 12601890 12801920 13001950 13201980 13402010 13602040 13802070 14002100 14202130 14402160 14602190 14802220 15002250 15202280 15402310 15602340 15802370 16002400 16202430 16402460 16602490 16802520 17002550 17202580 17402610 17602640 17802670 18002700 18202730 18402760 18602790 18802820 19002850 19202880 19402910 19602940 19802970 20003000 20203030 20403060 20603090 20803120 21003150 21203180 21403210 21603240 21803270 22003300 22203330 22403360 22603390 22803420 23003450 23203480 23403510 23603540 23803570 24003600 24203630 24403660 24603690 24803720 25003750 25203780 25403810 25603840 25803870 26003900 26203930 26403960 26603990 26804020 27004050 27204080 27404110 27604140 27804170 28004200 28204230 28404260 28604290 28804320 29004350 29204380 29404410 29604440 29804470 30004500 30204530 30404560 30604590 30804620 31004650 31204680 31404710 31604740 31804770 32004800 32204830 32404860 32604890 32804920 33004950 33204980 33405010 33605040 33805070 34005100 34205130 34405160 34605190 34805220 35005250 35205280 35405310 35605340 35805370 36005400 36205430 36405460 36605490 36805520 37005550 37205580 37405610 37605640 37805670 38005700 38205730 38405760 38605790 38805820 39005850 39205880 39405910 39605940 39805970 40006000 40206030 40406060 40606090 40806120 41006150 41206180 41406210 41606240 41806270 42006300 42206330 42406360 42606390 42806420 43006450 43206480 43406510 43606540 43806570 44006600 44206630 44406660 44606690 44806720 45006750 45206780 45406810 45606840 45806870 46006900 46206930 46406960 46606990 46807020 47007050 47207080 47407110 47607140 47807170 48007200 48207230 48407260 48607290 48807320 49007350 49207380 49407410 49607440 49807470 50007500 50207530 50407560 50607590 50807620 51007650 51207680 51407710 51607740 51807770 52007800 52207830 52407860 52607890 52807920 53007950 53207980 53408010 53608040 53808070 54008100 54208130 54408160 54608190 54808220 55008250 55208280 55408310 55608340 55808370 56008400 56208430 56408460 56608490 56808520 57008550 57208580 57408610 57608640 57808670 58008700 58208730 58408760 58608790 58808820 59008850 59208880 59408910 59608940 59808970 60009000 60209030 60409060 60609090 60809120 61009150 61209180 61409210 61609240 61809270 62009300 62209330 62409360 62609390 62809420 63009450 63209480 63409510 63609540 63809570 64009600 64209630 64409660 64609690 64809720 65009750 65209780 65409810 65609840 65809870 66009900 66209930 66409960 66609990 668010020 670010050 672010080 674010110 676010140 678010170 680010200 682010230 684010260 686010290 688010320 690010350 692010380 694010410 696010440 698010470 700010500 702010530 704010560 706010590 708010620 710010650 712010680 714010710 716010740 718010770 720010800 722010830 724010860 726010890 728010920 730010950 732010980 734011010 736011040 738011070 740011100 742011130 744011160 746011190 748011220 750011250 752011280 754011310 756011340 758011370 760011400 762011430 764011460 766011490 768011520 770011550 772011580 774011610 776011640 778011670 780011700 782011730 784011760 786011790 788011820 790011850 792011880 794011910 796011940 798011970 800012000 802012030 804012060 806012090 808012120 810012150 812012180 814012210 816012240 818012270 820012300 822012330 824012360 826012390 828012420 830012450 832012480 834012510 836012540 838012570 840012600 842012630 844012660 846012690 848012720 850012750 852012780 854012810 856012840 858012870 860012900 862012930 864012960 866012990 868013020 870013050 872013080 874013110 876013140 878013170 880013200 882013230 884013260 886013290 888013320 890013350 892013380 894013410 896013440 898013470 900013500 902013530 904013560 906013590 908013620 910013650 912013680 914013710 916013740 918013770 920013800 922013830 924013860 926013890 928013920 930013950 932013980 934014010 93...
Grarr Dexx Snuff Box 377	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:14:00 - [121] - Quote Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [122] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: 11.5ISK 23ISK 34.5ISK 46ISK 57.5ISK 69ISK 710.5ISK 812ISK 913.5ISK 1015ISK 1116.5ISK 1218ISK 1319.5ISK 1421ISK 1522.5ISK 1624ISK 1725.5ISK 1827ISK 1928.5ISK 2030ISK 2131.5ISK 2233ISK 2334.5ISK 2436ISK 2537.5ISK 2639ISK 2740.5ISK 2842ISK 2943.5ISK 3045ISK 3146.5ISK 3248ISK 3349.5ISK 3451ISK 3552.5ISK 3654ISK 3755.5ISK 3857ISK 3958.5ISK 4060ISK 4161.5ISK 4263ISK 4364.5ISK 4466ISK 4567.5ISK 4669ISK 4770.5ISK 4872ISK 4973.5ISK 5075ISK 5176.5ISK 5278ISK 5379.5ISK 5481ISK 5582.5ISK 5684ISK 5785.5ISK 5887ISK 5988.5ISK 6090ISK 6191.5ISK 6293ISK 6394.5ISK 6496ISK 6597.5ISK 6699ISK 67100.5ISK 68102ISK 69103.5ISK 70105ISK 71106.5ISK 72108ISK 73109.5ISK 74111ISK 75112.5ISK 76114ISK 77115.5ISK 78117ISK 79118.5ISK 80120ISK 81121.5ISK 82123ISK 83124.5ISK 84126ISK 85127.5ISK 86129ISK 87130.5ISK 88132ISK 89133.5ISK 90135ISK 91136.5ISK 92138ISK 93139.5ISK 94141ISK 95142.5ISK 96144ISK 97145.5ISK 98147ISK 99148.5ISK 100150ISK 101151.5ISK 102153ISK 103154.5ISK 104156ISK 105157.5ISK 106159ISK 107160.5ISK 108162ISK 109163.5ISK 110165ISK 111166.5ISK 112168ISK 113169.5ISK 114171ISK 115172.5ISK 116174ISK 117175.5ISK 118177ISK 119178.5ISK 120180ISK 121181.5ISK 122183ISK 123184.5ISK 124186ISK 125187.5ISK 126189ISK 127190.5ISK 128192ISK 129193.5ISK 130195ISK 131196.5ISK 132198ISK 133199.5ISK 134201ISK 135202.5ISK 136204ISK 137205.5ISK 138207ISK 139208.5ISK 140210ISK 141211.5ISK 142213ISK 143214.5ISK 144216ISK 145217.5ISK 146219ISK 147220.5ISK 148222ISK 149223.5ISK 150225ISK 151226.5ISK 152228ISK 153229.5ISK 154231ISK 155232.5ISK 156234ISK 157235.5ISK 158237ISK 159238.5ISK 160240ISK 161241.5ISK 162243ISK 163244.5ISK 164246ISK 165247.5ISK 166249ISK 167250.5ISK 168252ISK 169253.5ISK 170255ISK 171256.5ISK 172258ISK 173259.5ISK 174261ISK 175262.5ISK 176264ISK 177265.5ISK 178267ISK 179268.5ISK 180270ISK 181271.5ISK 182273ISK 183274.5ISK 184276ISK 185277.5ISK 186279ISK 187280.5ISK 188282ISK 189283.5ISK 190285ISK 191286.5ISK 192288ISK 193289.5ISK 194291ISK 195292.5ISK 196294ISK 197295.5ISK 198297ISK 199298.5ISK 200300ISK 201301.5ISK 202303ISK 203304.5ISK 204306ISK 205307.5ISK 206309ISK 207310.5ISK 208312ISK 209313.5ISK 210315ISK 211316.5ISK 212318ISK 213319.5ISK 214321ISK 215322.5ISK 216324ISK 217325.5ISK 218327ISK 219328.5ISK 220330ISK 221331.5ISK 222333ISK 223334.5ISK 224336ISK 225337.5ISK 226339ISK 227340.5ISK 228342ISK 229343.5ISK 230345ISK 231346.5ISK 232348ISK 233349.5ISK 234351ISK 235352.5ISK 236354ISK 237355.5ISK 238357ISK 239358.5ISK 240360ISK 241361.5ISK 242363ISK 243364.5ISK 244366ISK 245367.5ISK 246369ISK 247370.5ISK 248372ISK 249373.5ISK 250375ISK 251376.5ISK 252378ISK 253379.5ISK 254381ISK 255382.5ISK 256384ISK 257385.5ISK 258387ISK 259388.5ISK 260390ISK 261391.5ISK 262393ISK 263394.5ISK 264396ISK 265397.5ISK 266399ISK 267400.5ISK 268402ISK 269403.5ISK 270405ISK 271406.5ISK 272408ISK 273409.5ISK 274411ISK 275412.5ISK 276414ISK 277415.5ISK 278417ISK 279418.5ISK 280420ISK 281421.5ISK 282423ISK 283424.5ISK 284426ISK 285427.5ISK 286429ISK 287430.5ISK 288432ISK 289433.5ISK 290435ISK 291436.5ISK 292438ISK 293439.5ISK 294441ISK 295442.5ISK 296444ISK 297445.5ISK 298447ISK 299448.5ISK 300450ISK 301451.5ISK 302453ISK 303454.5ISK 304456ISK 305457.5ISK 306459ISK 307460.5ISK 308462ISK 309463.5ISK 310465ISK 311466.5ISK 312468ISK 313469.5ISK 314471ISK 315472.5ISK 316474ISK 317475.5ISK 318477ISK 319478.5ISK 320480ISK 321481.5ISK 322483ISK 323484.5ISK 324486ISK 325487.5ISK 326489ISK 327490.5ISK 328492ISK 329493.5ISK 330495ISK 331496.5ISK 332498ISK 333499.5ISK 334501ISK 335502.5ISK 336504ISK 337505.5ISK 338507ISK 339508.5ISK 340510ISK 341511.5ISK 342513ISK 343514.5ISK 344516ISK 345517.5ISK 346519ISK 347520.5ISK 348522ISK 349523.5ISK 350525ISK 351526.5ISK 352528ISK 353529.5ISK 354531ISK 355532.5ISK 356534ISK 357535.5ISK 358537ISK 359538.5ISK 360540ISK 361541.5ISK 362543ISK 363544.5ISK 364546ISK 365547.5ISK 366549ISK 367550.5ISK 368552ISK 369553.5ISK 370555ISK 371556.5ISK 372558ISK 373559.5ISK 374561ISK 375562.5ISK 376564ISK 377565.5ISK 378567ISK 379568.5ISK 380570ISK 381571.5ISK 382573ISK 383574.5ISK 384576ISK 385577.5ISK 386579ISK 387580.5ISK 388582ISK 389583.5ISK 390585ISK 391586.5ISK 392588ISK 393589.5ISK 394591ISK 395592.5ISK 396594ISK 397595.5ISK 398597ISK 399598.5ISK 400600ISK 401601.5ISK 402603ISK 403604.5ISK 404606ISK 405607.5ISK 406609ISK 407610.5ISK 408612ISK 409613.5ISK 410615ISK 411616.5ISK 412618ISK 413619.5ISK 414621ISK 415622.5ISK 416624ISK 417625.5ISK 418627ISK 419628.5ISK 420630ISK 421631.5ISK 422633ISK 423634.5ISK 424636ISK 425637.5ISK 426639ISK 427640.5ISK 428642ISK 429643.5ISK 430645ISK 431646.5ISK 432648ISK 433649.5ISK 434651ISK 435652.5ISK 436654ISK Converted to ISK i c
Destoya Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 263	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [123] - Quote tobs wrote: MissBolyai wrote: KiithSoban wrote: Came expecting to see power projection Nerf. Was disappointed. tbh, it's more of a power projection buff as poor alliances like BL and their ilk will be less inclined to be able to defray the cost of sending their cap fleet more than 3 jumps. I've a table to illustrate what it would cost a fleet of 50 dreads to deploy (in millions): 50 dreads (old)50 dreads (new) 280420 300450 320480 340510 360540 380570 400600 420630 440660 460690 480720 500750 520780 540810 560840 580870 600900 620930 640960 660990 6801020 7001050 7201080 7401110 7601140 7801170 8001200 8201230 8401260 8601290 8801320 9001350 9201380 9401410 9601440 9801470 10001500 10201530 10401560 10601590 10801620 11001650 11201680 11401710 11601740 11801770 12001800 12201830 12401860 12601890 12801920 13001950 13201980 13402010 13602040 13802070 14002100 14202130 14402160 14602190 14802220 15002250 15202280 15402310 15602340 15802370 16002400 16202430 16402460 16602490 16802520 17002550 17202580 17402610 17602640 17802670 18002700 18202730 18402760 18602790 18802820 19002850 19202880 19402910 19602940 19802970 20003000 20203030 20403060 20603090 20803120 21003150 21203180 21403210 21603240 21803270 22003300 22203330 22403360 22603390 22803420 23003450 23203480 23403510 23603540 23803570 24003600 24203630 24403660 24603690 24803720 25003750 25203780 25403810 25603840 25803870 26003900 26203930 26403960 26603990 26804020 27004050 27204080 27404110 27604140 27804170 28004200 28204230 28404260 28604290 28804320 29004350 29204380 29404410 29604440 29804470 30004500 30204530 30404560 30604590 30804620 31004650 31204680 31404710 31604740 31804770 32004800 32204830 32404860 32604890 32804920 33004950 33204980 33405010 33605040 33805070 34005100 34205130 34405160 34605190 34805220 35005250 35205280 35405310 35605340 35805370 36005400 36205430 36405460 36605490 36805520 37005550 37205580 37405610 37605640 37805670 38005700 38205730 38405760 38605790 38805820 39005850 39205880 39405910 39605940 39805970 40006000 40206030 40406060 40606090 40806120 41006150 41206180 41406210 41606240 41806270 42006300 42206330 42406360 42606390 42806420 43006450 43206480 43406510 43606540 43806570 44006600 44206630 44406660 44606690 44806720 45006750 45206780 45406810 45606840 45806870 46006900 46206930 46406960 46606990 46807020 47007050 47207080 47407110 47607140 47807170 48007200 48207230 48407260 48607290 48807320 49007350 49207380 49407410 49607440 49807470 50007500 50207530 50407560 50607590 50807620 51007650 51207680 51407710 51607740 51807770 52007800 52207830 52407860 52607890 52807920 53007950 53207980 53408010 53608040 53808070 54008100 54208130 54408160 54608190 54808220 55008250 55208280 55408310 55608340 55808370 56008400 56208430 56408460 56608490 56808520 57008550 57208580 57408610 57608640 57808670 58008700 58208730 58408760 58608790 58808820 59008850 59208880 59408910 59608940 59808970 60009000 60209030 60409060 60609090 60809120 61009150 61209180 61409210 61609240 61809270 62009300 62209330 62409360 62609390 62809420 63009450 63209480 63409510 63609540 63809570 64009600 64209630 64409660 64609690 64809720 65009750 65209780 65409810 65609840 65809870 66009900 66209930 66409960 66609990 668010020 670010050 672010080 674010110 676010140 678010170 680010200 682010230 684010260 686010290 688010320 690010350 692010380 694010410 696010440 698010470 700010500 702010530 704010560 706010590 708010620 710010650 712010680 714010710 716010740 718010770 720010800 722010830 724010860 726010890 728010920 730010950 732010980 734011010 736011040 738011070 740011100 742011130 744011160 746011190 748011220 750011250 752011280 754011310 756011340 758011370 760011400 762011430 764011460 766011490 768011520 770011550 772011580 774011610 776011640 778011670 780011700 782011730 784011760 786011790 788011820 790011850 792011880 794011910 796011940 798011970 800012000 802012030 804012060 806012090 808012120 810012150 812012180 814012210 816012240 818012270 820012300 834012510 836012540 838012570 840012600 842012630 844012660 846012690 848012720 850012750 852012780 854012810 856012840 858012870 860012900 862012930 864012960 866012990 868013020 870013050 872013080 874013110 876013140 878013170 880013200 882013230 884013260 886013290 888013320 890013350 892013380 894013410 896013440 898013470 900013500 902013530 904013560 906013590 908013620 910013650 912013680 914013710 916013740 918013770 920013800 922013830 924013860 926013890 928013920 930013950 932013980 934014010 936014040 938014070 9...
Thead Enco 47th Ronin 160	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [124] - Quote FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? -á"A Lannister always pays his debts." -áTyrion Lannister
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 98	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [125] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 2...
Mai Khumm 593	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [126] - Quote Good thing I have a stockpile of ICE for such a price hike! insert witty saying here
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 218	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [127] - Quote Quote: I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it[/quote] I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258...
Sipphakta en Gravonere 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 553	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [128] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: ZehNarume wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I don't quite understand, can you give some more numerical values from 270 on wards? Sure... 270405 271406.5 272408 273409.5 274411 275412.5 276414 277415.5 278417 279418.5 280420 281421.5 282423 283424.5 284426 285427.5 286429 287430.5 288432 289433.5 290435 291436.5 292438 293439.5 294441 295442.5 296444 297445.5 298447 299448.5 300450 301451.5 302453 303454.5 304456 305457.5 306459 307460.5 308462 309463.5 310465 311466.5 312468 313469.5 314471 315472.5 316474 317475.5 318477 319478.5 320480 321481.5 322483 323484.5 324486 325487.5 326489 327490.5 328492 329493.5 330495 331496.5 332498 333499.5 334501 335502.5 336504 337505.5 338507 339508.5 340510 341511.5 342513 343514.5 344516 345517.5 346519 347520.5 348522 349523.5 350525 351526.5 352528 353529.5 354531 355532.5 356534 357535.5 358537 359538.5 360540 361541.5 362543 363544.5 364546 365547.5 366549 367550.5 368552 369553.5 370555 371556.5 372558 373559.5 374561 375562.5 376564 377565.5 378567 379568.5 380570 381571.5 382573 383574.5 384576 385577.5 386579 387580.5 388582 389583.5 390585 391586.5 392588 393589.5 394591 395592.5 396594 397595.5 398597 399598.5 400600 401601.5 402603 403604.5 404606 405607.5 406609 407610.5 408612 409613.5 410615 411616.5 412618 413619.5 414621 415622.5 416624 417625.5 418627 419628.5 420630 421631.5 422633 423634.5 424636 425637.5 426639 427640.5 428642 429643.5 430645 431646.5 432648 433649.5 434651 435652.5 436654 437655.5 438657 439658.5 440660 441661.5 442663 443664.5 444666 445667.5 446669 447670.5 448672 449673.5 450675 451676.5 452678 Thanks for clarifying, you are a good man. Good clarification of the original post, thanks! In other news: Can somebody help me tie my shoelaces? They got open and my caretaker is absent.
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:15:00 - [129] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: ZehNarume wrote: 11.5ISK 23ISK 34.5ISK 46ISK 57.5ISK 69ISK 710.5ISK 812ISK 913.5ISK 1015ISK 1116.5ISK 1218ISK 1319.5ISK 1421ISK 1522.5ISK 1624ISK 1725.5ISK 1827ISK 1928.5ISK 2030ISK 2131.5ISK 2233ISK 2334.5ISK 2436ISK 2537.5ISK 2639ISK 2740.5ISK 2842ISK 2943.5ISK 3045ISK 3146.5ISK 3248ISK 3349.5ISK 3451ISK 3552.5ISK 3654ISK 3755.5ISK 3857ISK 3958.5ISK 4060ISK 4161.5ISK 4263ISK 4364.5ISK 4466ISK 4567.5ISK 4669ISK 4770.5ISK 4872ISK 4973.5ISK 5075ISK 5176.5ISK 5278ISK 5379.5ISK 5481ISK 5582.5ISK 5684ISK 5785.5ISK 5887ISK 5988.5ISK 6090ISK 6191.5ISK 6293ISK 6394.5ISK 6496ISK 6597.5ISK 6699ISK 67100.5ISK 68102ISK 69103.5ISK 70105ISK 71106.5ISK 72108ISK 73109.5ISK 74111ISK 75112.5ISK 76114ISK 77115.5ISK 78117ISK 79118.5ISK 80120ISK 81121.5ISK 82123ISK 83124.5ISK 84126ISK 85127.5ISK 86129ISK 87130.5ISK 88132ISK 89133.5ISK 90135ISK 91136.5ISK 92138ISK 93139.5ISK 94141ISK 95142.5ISK 96144ISK 97145.5ISK 98147ISK 99148.5ISK 100150ISK 101151.5ISK 102153ISK 103154.5ISK 104156ISK 105157.5ISK 106159ISK 107160.5ISK 108162ISK 109163.5ISK 110165ISK 111166.5ISK 112168ISK 113169.5ISK 114171ISK 115172.5ISK 116174ISK 117175.5ISK 118177ISK 119178.5ISK 120180ISK 121181.5ISK 122183ISK 123184.5ISK 124186ISK 125187.5ISK 126189ISK 127190.5ISK 128192ISK 129193.5ISK 130195ISK 131196.5ISK 132198ISK 133199.5ISK 134201ISK 135202.5ISK 136204ISK 137205.5ISK 138207ISK 139208.5ISK 140210ISK 141211.5ISK 142213ISK 143214.5ISK 144216ISK 145217.5ISK 146219ISK 147220.5ISK 148222ISK 149223.5ISK 150225ISK 151226.5ISK 152228ISK 153229.5ISK 154231ISK 155232.5ISK 156234ISK 157235.5ISK 158237ISK 159238.5ISK 160240ISK 161241.5ISK 162243ISK 163244.5ISK 164246ISK 165247.5ISK 166249ISK 167250.5ISK 168252ISK 169253.5ISK 170255ISK 171256.5ISK 172258ISK 173259.5ISK 174261ISK 175262.5ISK 176264ISK 177265.5ISK 178267ISK 179268.5ISK 180270ISK 181271.5ISK 182273ISK 183274.5ISK 184276ISK 185277.5ISK 186279ISK 187280.5ISK 188282ISK 189283.5ISK 190285ISK 191286.5ISK 192288ISK 193289.5ISK 194291ISK 195292.5ISK 196294ISK 197295.5ISK 198297ISK 199298.5ISK 200300ISK 201301.5ISK 202303ISK 203304.5ISK 204306ISK 205307.5ISK 206309ISK 207310.5ISK 208312ISK 209313.5ISK 210315ISK 211316.5ISK 212318ISK 213319.5ISK 214321ISK 215322.5ISK 216324ISK 217325.5ISK 218327ISK 219328.5ISK 220330ISK 221331.5ISK 222333ISK 223334.5ISK 224336ISK 225337.5ISK 226339ISK 227340.5ISK 228342ISK 229343.5ISK 230345ISK 231346.5ISK 232348ISK 233349.5ISK 234351ISK 235352.5ISK 236354ISK 237355.5ISK 238357ISK 239358.5ISK 240360ISK 241361.5ISK 242363ISK 243364.5ISK 244366ISK 245367.5ISK 246369ISK 247370.5ISK 248372ISK 249373.5ISK 250375ISK 251376.5ISK 252378ISK 253379.5ISK 254381ISK 255382.5ISK 256384ISK 257385.5ISK 258387ISK 259388.5ISK 260390ISK 261391.5ISK 262393ISK 263394.5ISK 264396ISK 265397.5ISK 266399ISK 267400.5ISK 268402ISK 269403.5ISK 270405ISK 271406.5ISK 272408ISK 273409.5ISK 274411ISK 275412.5ISK 276414ISK 277415.5ISK 278417ISK 279418.5ISK 280420ISK 281421.5ISK 282423ISK 283424.5ISK 284426ISK 285427.5ISK 286429ISK 287430.5ISK 288432ISK 289433.5ISK 290435ISK 291436.5ISK 292438ISK 293439.5ISK 294441ISK 295442.5ISK 296444ISK 297445.5ISK 298447ISK 299448.5ISK 300450ISK 301451.5ISK 302453ISK 303454.5ISK 304456ISK 305457.5ISK 306459ISK 307460.5ISK 308462ISK 309463.5ISK 310465ISK 311466.5ISK 312468ISK 313469.5ISK 314471ISK 315472.5ISK 316474ISK 317475.5ISK 318477ISK 319478.5ISK 320480ISK 321481.5ISK 322483ISK 323484.5ISK 324486ISK 325487.5ISK 326489ISK 327490.5ISK 328492ISK 329493.5ISK 330495ISK 331496.5ISK 332498ISK 333499.5ISK 334501ISK 335502.5ISK 336504ISK 337505.5ISK 338507ISK 339508.5ISK 340510ISK 341511.5ISK 342513ISK 343514.5ISK 344516ISK 345517.5ISK 346519ISK 347520.5ISK 348522ISK 349523.5ISK 350525ISK 351526.5ISK 352528ISK 353529.5ISK 354531ISK 355532.5ISK 356534ISK 357535.5ISK 358537ISK 359538.5ISK 360540ISK 361541.5ISK 362543ISK 363544.5ISK 364546ISK 365547.5ISK 366549ISK 367550.5ISK 368552ISK 369553.5ISK 370555ISK 371556.5ISK 372558ISK 373559.5ISK 374561ISK 375562.5ISK 376564ISK 377565.5ISK 378567ISK 379568.5ISK 380570ISK 381571.5ISK 382573ISK 383574.5ISK 384576ISK 385577.5ISK 386579ISK 387580.5ISK 388582ISK 389583.5ISK 390585ISK 391586.5ISK 392588ISK 393589.5ISK 394591ISK 395592.5ISK 396594ISK 397595.5ISK 398597ISK 399598.5ISK 400600ISK 401601.5ISK 402603ISK 403604.5ISK 404606ISK 405607.5ISK 406609ISK 407610.5ISK 408612ISK 409613.5ISK 410615ISK 411616.5ISK 412618ISK 413619.5ISK 414621ISK 415622.5ISK 416624ISK 417625.5ISK 418627ISK 419628.5ISK 420630ISK 421631.5ISK 422633ISK 423634.5ISK 424636ISK 425637.5ISK 426639ISK 427640.5ISK 428642ISK 429643.5ISK 430645ISK 431646.5ISK 432648ISK 433649.5ISK Converted to ISK i c no problem https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:16:00 - [130] - Quote Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of MY **** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY **** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL .
iskflakes 910	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:16:00 - [131] - Quote Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. -
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:17:00 - [132] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of MY **** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY ** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL Another member of MY **** ALLIANCE showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to POST LIKE A MONGREL . can this be converted to isk?
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:17:00 - [133] - Quote iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. can we get a size comparison
RoCkEt X Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 70	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:18:00 - [134] - Quote iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. LEET, YOUR POAST IS OF INSUFFICIENT LENGTH DisREGARD -Lee
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 746	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:18:00 - [135] - Quote Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland. Hats says "you're next in line for a job, then" .
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:19:00 - [136] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. can we get a size comparison please current m3 to updated m3 in increments 500m3 to the size of a titan fleet hanger of 100,000 m3 pls https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 83	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:19:00 - [137] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: 11.5ISK 23ISK 34.5ISK 46ISK 57.5ISK 69ISK 710.5ISK 812ISK 913.5ISK 1015ISK 1116.5ISK 1218ISK 1319.5ISK 1421ISK 1522.5ISK 1624ISK 1725.5ISK 1827ISK 1928.5ISK 2030ISK 2131.5ISK 2233ISK 2334.5ISK 2436ISK 2537.5ISK 2639ISK 2740.5ISK 2842ISK 2943.5ISK 3045ISK 3146.5ISK 3248ISK 3349.5ISK 3451ISK 3552.5ISK 3654ISK 3755.5ISK 3857ISK 3958.5ISK 4060ISK 4161.5ISK 4263ISK 4364.5ISK 4466ISK 4567.5ISK 4669ISK 4770.5ISK 4872ISK 4973.5ISK 5075ISK 5176.5ISK 5278ISK 5379.5ISK 5481ISK 5582.5ISK 5684ISK 5785.5ISK 5887ISK 5988.5ISK 6090ISK 6191.5ISK 6293ISK 6394.5ISK 6496ISK 6597.5ISK 6699ISK 67100.5ISK 68102ISK 69103.5ISK 70105ISK 71106.5ISK 72108ISK 73109.5ISK 74111ISK 75112.5ISK 76114ISK 77115.5ISK 78117ISK 79118.5ISK 80120ISK 81121.5ISK 82123ISK 83124.5ISK 84126ISK 85127.5ISK 86129ISK 87130.5ISK 88132ISK 89133.5ISK 90135ISK 91136.5ISK 92138ISK 93139.5ISK 94141ISK 95142.5ISK 96144ISK 97145.5ISK 98147ISK 99148.5ISK 100150ISK 101151.5ISK 102153ISK 103154.5ISK 104156ISK 105157.5ISK 106159ISK 107160.5ISK 108162ISK 109163.5ISK 110165ISK 111166.5ISK 112168ISK 113169.5ISK 114171ISK 115172.5ISK 116174ISK 117175.5ISK 118177ISK 119178.5ISK 120180ISK 121181.5ISK 122183ISK 123184.5ISK 124186ISK 125187.5ISK 126189ISK 127190.5ISK 128192ISK 129193.5ISK 130195ISK 131196.5ISK 132198ISK 133199.5ISK 134201ISK 135202.5ISK 136204ISK 137205.5ISK 138207ISK 139208.5ISK 140210ISK 141211.5ISK 142213ISK 143214.5ISK 144216ISK 145217.5ISK 146219ISK 147220.5ISK 148222ISK 149223.5ISK 150225ISK 151226.5ISK 152228ISK 153229.5ISK 154231ISK 155232.5ISK 156234ISK 157235.5ISK 158237ISK 159238.5ISK 160240ISK 161241.5ISK 162243ISK 163244.5ISK 164246ISK 165247.5ISK 166249ISK 167250.5ISK 168252ISK 169253.5ISK 170255ISK 171256.5ISK 172258ISK 173259.5ISK 174261ISK 175262.5ISK 176264ISK 177265.5ISK 178267ISK 179268.5ISK 180270ISK 181271.5ISK 182273ISK 183274.5ISK 184276ISK 185277.5ISK 186279ISK 187280.5ISK 188282ISK 189283.5ISK 190285ISK 191286.5ISK 192288ISK 193289.5ISK 194291ISK 195292.5ISK 196294ISK 197295.5ISK 198297ISK 199298.5ISK 200300ISK 201301.5ISK 202303ISK 203304.5ISK 204306ISK 205307.5ISK 206309ISK 207310.5ISK 208312ISK 209313.5ISK 210315ISK 211316.5ISK 212318ISK 213319.5ISK 214321ISK 215322.5ISK 216324ISK 217325.5ISK 218327ISK 219328.5ISK 220330ISK 221331.5ISK 222333ISK 223334.5ISK 224336ISK 225337.5ISK 226339ISK 227340.5ISK 228342ISK 229343.5ISK 230345ISK 231346.5ISK 232348ISK 233349.5ISK 234351ISK 235352.5ISK 236354ISK 237355.5ISK 238357ISK 239358.5ISK 240360ISK 241361.5ISK 242363ISK 243364.5ISK 244366ISK 245367.5ISK 246369ISK 247370.5ISK 248372ISK 249373.5ISK 250375ISK 251376.5ISK 252378ISK 253379.5ISK 254381ISK 255382.5ISK 256384ISK 257385.5ISK 258387ISK 259388.5ISK 260390ISK 261391.5ISK 262393ISK 263394.5ISK 264396ISK 265397.5ISK 266399ISK 267400.5ISK 268402ISK 269403.5ISK 270405ISK 271406.5ISK 272408ISK 273409.5ISK 274411ISK 275412.5ISK 276414ISK 277415.5ISK 278417ISK 279418.5ISK 280420ISK 281421.5ISK 282423ISK 283424.5ISK 284426ISK 285427.5ISK 286429ISK 287430.5ISK 288432ISK 289433.5ISK 290435ISK 291436.5ISK 292438ISK 293439.5ISK 294441ISK 295442.5ISK 296444ISK 297445.5ISK 298447ISK 299448.5ISK 300450ISK 301451.5ISK 302453ISK 303454.5ISK 304456ISK 305457.5ISK 306459ISK 307460.5ISK 308462ISK 309463.5ISK 310465ISK 311466.5ISK 312468ISK 313469.5ISK 314471ISK 315472.5ISK 316474ISK 317475.5ISK 318477ISK 319478.5ISK 320480ISK 321481.5ISK 322483ISK 323484.5ISK 324486ISK 325487.5ISK 326489ISK 327490.5ISK 328492ISK 329493.5ISK 330495ISK 331496.5ISK 332498ISK 333499.5ISK 334501ISK 335502.5ISK 336504ISK 337505.5ISK 338507ISK 339508.5ISK 340510ISK 341511.5ISK 342513ISK 343514.5ISK 344516ISK 345517.5ISK 346519ISK 347520.5ISK 348522ISK 349523.5ISK 350525ISK 351526.5ISK 352528ISK 353529.5ISK 354531ISK 355532.5ISK 356534ISK 357535.5ISK 358537ISK 359538.5ISK 360540ISK 361541.5ISK 362543ISK 363544.5ISK 364546ISK 365547.5ISK 366549ISK 367550.5ISK 368552ISK 369553.5ISK 370555ISK 371556.5ISK 372558ISK 373559.5ISK 374561ISK 375562.5ISK 376564ISK 377565.5ISK 378567ISK 379568.5ISK 380570ISK 381571.5ISK 382573ISK 383574.5ISK 384576ISK 385577.5ISK 386579ISK 387580.5ISK 388582ISK 389583.5ISK 390585ISK 391586.5ISK 392588ISK 393589.5ISK 394591ISK 395592.5ISK 396594ISK 397595.5ISK 398597ISK 399598.5ISK 400600ISK Converted to ISK I realize it's a metric that some people decry, but I always find it interesting to see a "real world equivalent" of ISK in terms of currency. Would it be possible for someone to do that?
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:19:00 - [138] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. where are the tables?!?
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 452	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:20:00 - [139] - Quote Anyways Please go forward with increasing the bay size on jump bridge modules, given that liquid ozone isn't a tope (poor reading comprehension abounds here but I figure I oughta be explicit) and usage is increasing. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
XavierVE Reasonable People Of Sound Mind 256	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:21:00 - [140] - Quote Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland. He really is the dumbest, isn't he? I haven't seen a single post by Fozzie that was well-thought out, nor a change that really made sense. The game is just as imbalanced prior to his hiring, in some ways, moreso. This is such a stupid change. "We'd like to spur null sec industry! Oh, by the way, now your JF runs cost 50% so you can't import materials as cheaply to do that null-sec industry!" That's really smart, given that the main limitation on any null region is that you only have access to a limited amount of moon material natively. To think that isotope prices will go DOWN because "more people will be mining ice" is also pretty dunderheaded. Take an economics class sometime. ******* intelligent. The last MMO I played extensively was ruined when the developer went cheap-o and hired "devs" who could do nothing but change numbers. CCP has made the same mistake with this clown. All he can do is randomly change numbers, he can't develop actual content. Wouldn't be so bad if he had any sort of long-term vision of the kinds of unintended consequences his inept additions to the game actually cause.
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 98	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:21:00 - [141] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. can we get a size comparison certainly Topes (old)Topes (new) 0.150.1 0.30.2 0.450.3 0.60.4 0.750.5 0.90.6 1.050.7 1.20.8 1.350.9 1.51 1.651.1 1.81.2 1.951.3 2.11.4 2.251.5 2.41.6 2.551.7 2.71.8 2.851.9 32 3.152.1 3.32.2 3.452.3 3.62.4 3.752.5 3.92.6 4.052.7 4.22.8 4.352.9 4.53 4.653.1 4.83.2 4.953.3 5.13.4 5.253.5 5.43.6 5.553.7 5.73.8 5.853.9 64 6.154.1 6.34.2 6.454.3 6.64.4 6.754.5 6.94.6 7.054.7 7.24.8 7.354.9 7.55 7.655.1 7.85.2 7.955.3 8.15.4 8.255.5 8.45.6 8.555.7 8.75.8 8.855.9 96 9.156.1 9.36.2 9.456.3 9.66.4 9.756.5 9.96.6 10.056.7 10.26.8 10.356.9 10.57 10.657.1 10.87.2 10.957.3 11.17.4 11.257.5 11.47.6 11.557.7 11.77.8 11.857.9 128 12.158.1 12.38.2 12.458.3 12.68.4 12.758.5 12.98.6 13.058.7 13.28.8 13.358.9 13.59 13.659.1 13.89.2 13.959.3 14.19.4 14.259.5 14.49.6 14.559.7 14.79.8 14.859.9 1510 15.1510.1 15.310.2 15.4510.3 15.610.4 15.7510.5 15.910.6 16.0510.7 16.210.8 16.3510.9 16.511 16.6511.1 16.811.2 16.9511.3 17.111.4 17.2511.5 17.411.6 17.5511.7 17.711.8 17.8511.9 1812 18.1512.1 18.312.2 18.4512.3 18.612.4 18.7512.5 18.912.6 19.0512.7 19.212.8 19.3512.9 19.513 19.6513.1 19.813.2 19.9513.3 20.113.4 20.2513.5 20.413.6 20.5513.7 20.713.8 20.8513.9 2114 21.1514.1 21.314.2 21.4514.3 21.614.4 21.7514.5 21.914.6 22.0514.7 22.214.8 22.3514.9 22.515 22.6515.1 22.815.2 22.9515.3 23.115.4 23.2515.5 23.415.6 23.5515.7 23.715.8 23.8515.9 2416 24.1516.1 24.316.2 24.4516.3 24.616.4 24.7516.5 24.916.6 25.0516.7 25.216.8 25.3516.9 25.517 25.6517.1 25.817.2 25.9517.3 26.117.4 26.2517.5 26.417.6 26.5517.7 26.717.8 26.8517.9 2718 27.1518.1 27.318.2 27.4518.3 27.618.4 27.7518.5 27.918.6 28.0518.7 28.218.8 28.3518.9 28.519 28.6519.1 28.819.2 28.9519.3 29.119.4 29.2519.5 29.419.6 29.5519.7 29.719.8 29.8519.9 3020 30.1520.1 30.320.2 30.4520.3 30.620.4 30.7520.5 30.920.6 31.0520.7 31.220.8 31.3520.9 31.521 31.6521.1 31.821.2 31.9521.3 32.121.4 32.2521.5 32.421.6 32.5521.7 32.721.8 32.8521.9 3322 33.1522.1 33.322.2 33.4522.3 33.622.4 33.7522.5 33.922.6 34.0522.7 34.222.8 34.3522.9 34.523 34.6523.1 34.823.2 34.9523.3 35.123.4 35.2523.5 35.423.6 35.5523.7 35.723.8 35.8523.9 3624 36.1524.1 36.324.2 36.4524.3 36.624.4 36.7524.5 36.924.6 37.0524.7 37.224.8 37.3524.9 37.525 37.6525.1 37.825.2 37.9525.3 38.125.4 38.2525.5 38.425.6 38.5525.7 38.725.8 38.8525.9 3926 39.1526.1 39.326.2 39.4526.3 39.626.4 39.7526.5 39.926.6 40.0526.7 40.226.8 40.3526.9 40.527 40.6527.1 40.827.2 40.9527.3 41.127.4 41.2527.5 41.427.6 41.5527.7 41.727.8 41.8527.9 4228 42.1528.1 42.328.2 42.4528.3 42.628.4 42.7528.5 42.928.6 43.0528.7 43.228.8 43.3528.9 43.529 43.6529.1 43.829.2 43.9529.3 44.129.4 44.2529.5 44.429.6 44.5529.7 44.729.8 44.8529.9 4530 45.1530.1 45.330.2 45.4530.3 45.630.4 45.7530.5 45.930.6 46.0530.7 46.230.8 46.3530.9 46.531 46.6531.1 46.831.2 46.9531.3 47.131.4 47.2531.5 47.431.6 47.5531.7 47.731.8 47.8531.9 4832 48.1532.1 48.332.2 48.4532.3 48.632.4 48.7532.5 48.932.6 49.0532.7 49.232.8 49.3532.9 49.533 49.6533.1 49.833.2 49.9533.3 50.133.4 50.2533.5 50.433.6 50.5533.7 50.733.8 50.8533.9 5134 51.1534.1 51.334.2 51.4534.3 51.634.4 51.7534.5 51.934.6 52.0534.7 52.234.8 52.3534.9 52.535 52.6535.1 52.835.2 52.9535.3 53.135.4 53.2535.5 53.435.6 53.5535.7 53.735.8 53.8535.9 5436 54.1536.1 54.336.2 54.4536.3 54.636.4 54.7536.5 54.936.6 55.0536.7 55.236.8 55.3536.9 55.537 55.6537.1 55.837.2 55.9537.3 56.137.4 56.2537.5 56.437.6 56.5537.7 56.737.8 56.8537.9 5738 57.1538.1 57.338.2 57.4538.3 57.638.4 57.7538.5 57.938.6 58.0538.7 58.238.8 58.3538.9 58.539 58.6539.1 58.839.2 58.9539.3 59.139.4 59.2539.5 59.439.6 59.5539.7 59.739.8 59.8539.9 6040 60.1540.1 60.340.2 60.4540.3 60.640.4 60.7540.5 60.940.6 61.0540.7 61.240.8 61.3540.9 61.541 61.6541.1 61.841.2 61.9541.3 62.141.4 62.2541.5 62.441.6 62.5541.7 62.741.8 62.8541.9 6342 63.1542.1 63.342.2 63.4542.3 63.642.4 63.7542.5 63.942.6 64.0542.7 64.242.8 64.3542.9 64.543 64.6543.1 64.843.2 64.9543.3 65.143.4 65.2543.5 65.443.6 65.5543.7 65.743.8 65.8543.9 6644 66.1544.1 66.344.2 66.4544.3 66.644.4 66.7544.5 66.944.6 67.0544.7 67.244.8 67.3544.9 67.545 67.6545.1 67.845.2 67.9545.3 68.145.4 68.2545.5 68.445.6 68.5545.7 68.745.8 68.8545.9 6946 69.1546.1 69.346.2 69.4546.3 69.646.4 69.7546.5 69.946.6 70.0546.7 70.246.8 70.3546.9 70.547 ...
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:21:00 - [142] - Quote Needmore Longcat wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: 11.5ISK 23ISK 34.5ISK 46ISK 57.5ISK 69ISK 710.5ISK 812ISK 913.5ISK 1015ISK 1116.5ISK 1218ISK 1319.5ISK 1421ISK 1522.5ISK 1624ISK 1725.5ISK 1827ISK 1928.5ISK 2030ISK 2131.5ISK 2233ISK 2334.5ISK 2436ISK 2537.5ISK 2639ISK 2740.5ISK 2842ISK 2943.5ISK 3045ISK 3146.5ISK 3248ISK 3349.5ISK 3451ISK 3552.5ISK 3654ISK 3755.5ISK 3857ISK 3958.5ISK 4060ISK 4161.5ISK 4263ISK 4364.5ISK 4466ISK 4567.5ISK 4669ISK 4770.5ISK 4872ISK 4973.5ISK 5075ISK 5176.5ISK 5278ISK 5379.5ISK 5481ISK 5582.5ISK 5684ISK 5785.5ISK 5887ISK 5988.5ISK 6090ISK 6191.5ISK 6293ISK 6394.5ISK 6496ISK 6597.5ISK 6699ISK 67100.5ISK 68102ISK 69103.5ISK 70105ISK 71106.5ISK 72108ISK 73109.5ISK 74111ISK 75112.5ISK 76114ISK 77115.5ISK 78117ISK 79118.5ISK 80120ISK 81121.5ISK 82123ISK 83124.5ISK 84126ISK 85127.5ISK 86129ISK 87130.5ISK 88132ISK 89133.5ISK 90135ISK 91136.5ISK 92138ISK 93139.5ISK 94141ISK 95142.5ISK 96144ISK 97145.5ISK 98147ISK 99148.5ISK 100150ISK 101151.5ISK 102153ISK 103154.5ISK 104156ISK 105157.5ISK 106159ISK 107160.5ISK 108162ISK 109163.5ISK 110165ISK 111166.5ISK 112168ISK 113169.5ISK 114171ISK 115172.5ISK 116174ISK 117175.5ISK 118177ISK 119178.5ISK 120180ISK 121181.5ISK 122183ISK 123184.5ISK 124186ISK 125187.5ISK 126189ISK 127190.5ISK 128192ISK 129193.5ISK 130195ISK 131196.5ISK 132198ISK 133199.5ISK 134201ISK 135202.5ISK 136204ISK 137205.5ISK 138207ISK 139208.5ISK 140210ISK 141211.5ISK 142213ISK 143214.5ISK 144216ISK 145217.5ISK 146219ISK 147220.5ISK 148222ISK 149223.5ISK 150225ISK 151226.5ISK 152228ISK 153229.5ISK 154231ISK 155232.5ISK 156234ISK 157235.5ISK 158237ISK 159238.5ISK 160240ISK 161241.5ISK 162243ISK 163244.5ISK 164246ISK 165247.5ISK 166249ISK 167250.5ISK 168252ISK 169253.5ISK 170255ISK 171256.5ISK 172258ISK 173259.5ISK 174261ISK 175262.5ISK 176264ISK 177265.5ISK 178267ISK 179268.5ISK 180270ISK 181271.5ISK 182273ISK 183274.5ISK 184276ISK 185277.5ISK 186279ISK 187280.5ISK 188282ISK 189283.5ISK 190285ISK 191286.5ISK 192288ISK 193289.5ISK 194291ISK 195292.5ISK 196294ISK 197295.5ISK 198297ISK 199298.5ISK 200300ISK 201301.5ISK 202303ISK 203304.5ISK 204306ISK 205307.5ISK 206309ISK 207310.5ISK 208312ISK 209313.5ISK 210315ISK 211316.5ISK 212318ISK 213319.5ISK 214321ISK 215322.5ISK 216324ISK 217325.5ISK 218327ISK 219328.5ISK 220330ISK 221331.5ISK 222333ISK 223334.5ISK 224336ISK 225337.5ISK 226339ISK 227340.5ISK 228342ISK 229343.5ISK 230345ISK 231346.5ISK 232348ISK 233349.5ISK 234351ISK 235352.5ISK 236354ISK 237355.5ISK 238357ISK 239358.5ISK 240360ISK 241361.5ISK 242363ISK 243364.5ISK 244366ISK 245367.5ISK 246369ISK 247370.5ISK 248372ISK 249373.5ISK 250375ISK 251376.5ISK 252378ISK 253379.5ISK 254381ISK 255382.5ISK 256384ISK 257385.5ISK 258387ISK 259388.5ISK 260390ISK 261391.5ISK 262393ISK 263394.5ISK 264396ISK 265397.5ISK 266399ISK 267400.5ISK 268402ISK 269403.5ISK 270405ISK 271406.5ISK 272408ISK 273409.5ISK 274411ISK 275412.5ISK 276414ISK 277415.5ISK 278417ISK 279418.5ISK 280420ISK 281421.5ISK 282423ISK 283424.5ISK 284426ISK 285427.5ISK 286429ISK 287430.5ISK 288432ISK 289433.5ISK 290435ISK 291436.5ISK 292438ISK 293439.5ISK 294441ISK 295442.5ISK 296444ISK 297445.5ISK 298447ISK 299448.5ISK 300450ISK 301451.5ISK 302453ISK 303454.5ISK 304456ISK 305457.5ISK 306459ISK 307460.5ISK 308462ISK 309463.5ISK 310465ISK 311466.5ISK 312468ISK 313469.5ISK 314471ISK 315472.5ISK 316474ISK 317475.5ISK 318477ISK 319478.5ISK 320480ISK 321481.5ISK 322483ISK 323484.5ISK 324486ISK 325487.5ISK 326489ISK 327490.5ISK 328492ISK 329493.5ISK 330495ISK 331496.5ISK 332498ISK 333499.5ISK 334501ISK 335502.5ISK 336504ISK 337505.5ISK 338507ISK 339508.5ISK 340510ISK 341511.5ISK 342513ISK 343514.5ISK 344516ISK 345517.5ISK 346519ISK 347520.5ISK 348522ISK 349523.5ISK 350525ISK 351526.5ISK 352528ISK 353529.5ISK 354531ISK 355532.5ISK 356534ISK 357535.5ISK 358537ISK 359538.5ISK 360540ISK 361541.5ISK 362543ISK 363544.5ISK 364546ISK 365547.5ISK 366549ISK 367550.5ISK 368552ISK 369553.5ISK 370555ISK 371556.5ISK 372558ISK 373559.5ISK 374561ISK 375562.5ISK 376564ISK 377565.5ISK 378567ISK 379568.5ISK 380570ISK 381571.5ISK 382573ISK 383574.5ISK 384576ISK 385577.5ISK 386579ISK 387580.5ISK 388582ISK 389583.5ISK 390585ISK 391586.5ISK 392588ISK 393589.5ISK 394591ISK 395592.5ISK 396594ISK 397595.5ISK 398597ISK 399598.5ISK 400600ISK Converted to ISK I realize it's a metric that some people decry, but I always find it interesting to see a "real world equivalent" of ISK in terms of currency. Would it be possible for someone to do that? can we get real life m3 of the currency also please?
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:22:00 - [143] - Quote XavierVE wrote: Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland. He really is the dumbest, isn't he? I haven't seen a single post by Fozzie that was well-thought out, nor a change that really made sense. The game is just as imbalanced prior to his hiring, in some ways, moreso. This is such a stupid change. "We'd like to spur null sec industry! Oh, by the way, now your JF runs cost 50% so you can't import materials as cheaply to do that null-sec industry!" ******* intelligent. The last MMO I played extensively was ruined when the developer went cheap-o and hired "devs" who could do nothing but change numbers. CCP has made the same mistake with this clown. All he can do is randomly change numbers, he can't develop actual content. of sound mind more like of sound badposts
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:22:00 - [144] - Quote XavierVE wrote: Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland. He really is the dumbest, isn't he? I haven't seen a single post by Fozzie that was well-thought out, nor a change that really made sense. The game is just as imbalanced prior to his hiring, in some ways, moreso. This is such a stupid change. "We'd like to spur null sec industry! Oh, by the way, now your JF runs cost 50% so you can't import materials as cheaply to do that null-sec industry!" ******* intelligent. The last MMO I played extensively was ruined when the developer went cheap-o and hired "devs" who could do nothing but change numbers. CCP has made the same mistake with this clown. All he can do is randomly change numbers, he can't develop actual content. You can just titan bridge your jf, its half the cost of jumping it.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:23:00 - [145] - Quote MissBolyai wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. can we get a size comparison certainly Topes (old)Topes (new) 0.150.1 0.30.2 0.450.3 0.60.4 0.750.5 0.90.6 1.050.7 1.20.8 1.350.9 1.51 1.651.1 1.81.2 1.951.3 2.11.4 2.251.5 2.41.6 2.551.7 2.71.8 2.851.9 32 3.152.1 3.32.2 3.452.3 3.62.4 3.752.5 3.92.6 4.052.7 4.22.8 4.352.9 4.53 4.653.1 4.83.2 4.953.3 5.13.4 5.253.5 5.43.6 5.553.7 5.73.8 5.853.9 64 6.154.1 6.34.2 6.454.3 6.64.4 6.754.5 6.94.6 7.054.7 7.24.8 7.354.9 7.55 7.655.1 7.85.2 7.955.3 8.15.4 8.255.5 8.45.6 8.555.7 8.75.8 8.855.9 96 9.156.1 9.36.2 9.456.3 9.66.4 9.756.5 9.96.6 10.056.7 10.26.8 10.356.9 10.57 10.657.1 10.87.2 10.957.3 11.17.4 11.257.5 11.47.6 11.557.7 11.77.8 11.857.9 128 12.158.1 12.38.2 12.458.3 12.68.4 12.758.5 12.98.6 13.058.7 13.28.8 13.358.9 13.59 13.659.1 13.89.2 13.959.3 14.19.4 14.259.5 14.49.6 14.559.7 14.79.8 14.859.9 1510 15.1510.1 15.310.2 15.4510.3 15.610.4 15.7510.5 15.910.6 16.0510.7 16.210.8 16.3510.9 16.511 16.6511.1 16.811.2 16.9511.3 17.111.4 17.2511.5 17.411.6 17.5511.7 17.711.8 17.8511.9 1812 18.1512.1 18.312.2 18.4512.3 18.612.4 18.7512.5 18.912.6 19.0512.7 19.212.8 19.3512.9 19.513 19.6513.1 19.813.2 19.9513.3 20.113.4 20.2513.5 20.413.6 20.5513.7 20.713.8 20.8513.9 2114 21.1514.1 21.314.2 21.4514.3 21.614.4 21.7514.5 21.914.6 22.0514.7 22.214.8 22.3514.9 22.515 22.6515.1 22.815.2 22.9515.3 23.115.4 23.2515.5 23.415.6 23.5515.7 23.715.8 23.8515.9 2416 24.1516.1 24.316.2 24.4516.3 24.616.4 24.7516.5 24.916.6 25.0516.7 25.216.8 25.3516.9 25.517 25.6517.1 25.817.2 25.9517.3 26.117.4 26.2517.5 26.417.6 26.5517.7 26.717.8 26.8517.9 2718 27.1518.1 27.318.2 27.4518.3 27.618.4 27.7518.5 27.918.6 28.0518.7 28.218.8 28.3518.9 28.519 28.6519.1 28.819.2 28.9519.3 29.119.4 29.2519.5 29.419.6 29.5519.7 29.719.8 29.8519.9 3020 30.1520.1 30.320.2 30.4520.3 30.620.4 30.7520.5 30.920.6 31.0520.7 31.220.8 31.3520.9 31.521 31.6521.1 31.821.2 31.9521.3 32.121.4 32.2521.5 32.421.6 32.5521.7 32.721.8 32.8521.9 3322 33.1522.1 33.322.2 33.4522.3 33.622.4 33.7522.5 33.922.6 34.0522.7 34.222.8 34.3522.9 34.523 34.6523.1 34.823.2 34.9523.3 35.123.4 35.2523.5 35.423.6 35.5523.7 35.723.8 35.8523.9 3624 36.1524.1 36.324.2 36.4524.3 36.624.4 36.7524.5 36.924.6 37.0524.7 37.224.8 37.3524.9 37.525 37.6525.1 37.825.2 37.9525.3 38.125.4 38.2525.5 38.425.6 38.5525.7 38.725.8 38.8525.9 3926 39.1526.1 39.326.2 39.4526.3 39.626.4 39.7526.5 39.926.6 40.0526.7 40.226.8 40.3526.9 40.527 40.6527.1 40.827.2 40.9527.3 41.127.4 41.2527.5 41.427.6 41.5527.7 41.727.8 41.8527.9 4228 42.1528.1 42.328.2 42.4528.3 42.628.4 42.7528.5 42.928.6 43.0528.7 43.228.8 43.3528.9 43.529 43.6529.1 43.829.2 43.9529.3 44.129.4 44.2529.5 44.429.6 44.5529.7 44.729.8 44.8529.9 4530 45.1530.1 45.330.2 45.4530.3 45.630.4 45.7530.5 45.930.6 46.0530.7 46.230.8 46.3530.9 46.531 46.6531.1 46.831.2 46.9531.3 47.131.4 47.2531.5 47.431.6 47.5531.7 47.731.8 47.8531.9 4832 48.1532.1 48.332.2 48.4532.3 48.632.4 48.7532.5 48.932.6 49.0532.7 49.232.8 49.3532.9 49.533 49.6533.1 49.833.2 49.9533.3 50.133.4 50.2533.5 50.433.6 50.5533.7 50.733.8 50.8533.9 5134 51.1534.1 51.334.2 51.4534.3 51.634.4 51.7534.5 51.934.6 52.0534.7 52.234.8 52.3534.9 52.535 52.6535.1 52.835.2 52.9535.3 53.135.4 53.2535.5 53.435.6 53.5535.7 53.735.8 53.8535.9 5436 54.1536.1 54.336.2 54.4536.3 54.636.4 54.7536.5 54.936.6 55.0536.7 55.236.8 55.3536.9 55.537 55.6537.1 55.837.2 55.9537.3 56.137.4 56.2537.5 56.437.6 56.5537.7 56.737.8 56.8537.9 5738 57.1538.1 57.338.2 57.4538.3 57.638.4 57.7538.5 57.938.6 58.0538.7 58.238.8 58.3538.9 58.539 58.6539.1 58.839.2 58.9539.3 59.139.4 59.2539.5 59.439.6 59.5539.7 59.739.8 59.8539.9 6040 60.1540.1 60.340.2 60.4540.3 60.640.4 60.7540.5 60.940.6 61.0540.7 61.240.8 61.3540.9 61.541 61.6541.1 61.841.2 61.9541.3 62.141.4 62.2541.5 62.441.6 62.5541.7 62.741.8 62.8541.9 6342 63.1542.1 63.342.2 63.4542.3 63.642.4 63.7542.5 63.942.6 64.0542.7 64.242.8 64.3542.9 64.543 64.6543.1 64.843.2 64.9543.3 65.143.4 65.2543.5 65.443.6 65.5543.7 65.743.8 65.8543.9 6644 66.1544.1 66.344.2 66.4544.3 66.644.4 66.7544.5 66.944.6 67.0544.7 67.244.8 67.3544.9 67.545 67.6545.1 67.845.2 67.9545.3 68.145.4 68.2545.5 68.445.6 68.5545.7 68.745.8 68.8545.9 6946 69.1546.1 69.346.2 69.4546.3 69.646.4 69.7546.5 69....
Nartel Vortok Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 52	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:23:00 - [146] - Quote [/quote] Can someone tell me what these would be if they increased them further to 75% as Fozzie alluded to doing in the OP?[/quote] Here you go: 11.75 23.5 35.25 47 58.75 610.5 712.25 814 915.75 1017.5 1119.25 1221 1322.75 1424.5 1526.25 1628 1729.75 1831.5 1933.25 2035 2136.75 2238.5 2340.25 2442 2543.75 2645.5 2747.25 2849 2950.75 3052.5 3154.25 3256 3357.75 3459.5 3561.25 3663 3764.75 3866.5 3968.25 4070 4171.75 4273.5 4375.25 4477 4578.75 4680.5 4782.25 4884 4985.75 5087.5 5189.25 5291 5392.75 5494.5 5596.25 5698 5799.75 58101.5 59103.25 60105 61106.75 62108.5 63110.25 64112 65113.75 66115.5 67117.25 68119 69120.75 70122.5 71124.25 72126 73127.75 74129.5 75131.25 76133 77134.75 78136.5 79138.25 80140 81141.75 82143.5 83145.25 84147 85148.75 86150.5 87152.25 88154 89155.75 90157.5 91159.25 92161 93162.75 94164.5 95166.25 96168 97169.75 98171.5 99173.25 100175 101176.75 102178.5 103180.25 104182 105183.75 106185.5 107187.25 108189 109190.75 110192.5 111194.25 112196 113197.75 114199.5 115201.25 116203 117204.75 118206.5 119208.25 120210 121211.75 122213.5 123215.25 124217 125218.75 126220.5 127222.25 128224 129225.75 130227.5 131229.25 132231 133232.75 134234.5 135236.25 136238 137239.75 138241.5 139243.25 140245 141246.75 142248.5 143250.25 144252 145253.75 146255.5 147257.25 148259 149260.75 150262.5 151264.25 152266 153267.75 154269.5 155271.25 156273 157274.75 158276.5 159278.25 160280 161281.75 162283.5 163285.25 164287 165288.75 166290.5 167292.25 168294 169295.75 170297.5 171299.25 172301 173302.75 174304.5 175306.25 176308 177309.75 178311.5 179313.25 180315 181316.75 182318.5 183320.25 184322 185323.75 186325.5 187327.25 188329 189330.75 190332.5 191334.25 192336 193337.75 194339.5 195341.25 196343 197344.75 198346.5 199348.25 200350 201351.75 202353.5 203355.25 204357 205358.75 206360.5 207362.25 208364 209365.75 210367.5 211369.25 212371 213372.75 214374.5 215376.25 216378 217379.75 218381.5 219383.25 220385 221386.75 222388.5 223390.25 224392 225393.75 226395.5 227397.25 228399 229400.75 230402.5 231404.25 232406 233407.75 234409.5 235411.25 236413 237414.75 238416.5 239418.25 240420 241421.75 242423.5 243425.25 244427 245428.75 246430.5 247432.25 248434 249435.75 250437.5 251439.25 252441 253442.75 254444.5 255446.25 256448 257449.75 258451.5 259453.25 260455 261456.75 262458.5 263460.25 264462 265463.75 266465.5 267467.25 268469 269470.75 270472.5 271474.25 272476 273477.75 274479.5 275481.25 276483 277484.75 278486.5 279488.25 280490 281491.75 282493.5 283495.25 284497 285498.75 286500.5 287502.25 288504 289505.75 290507.5 291509.25 292511 293512.75 294514.5 295516.25 296518 297519.75 298521.5 299523.25 300525 301526.75 302528.5 303530.25 304532 305533.75 306535.5 307537.25 308539 309540.75 310542.5 311544.25 312546 313547.75 314549.5 315551.25 316553 317554.75 318556.5 319558.25 320560 321561.75 322563.5 323565.25 324567 325568.75 326570.5 327572.25 328574 329575.75 330577.5 331579.25 332581 333582.75 334584.5 335586.25 336588 337589.75 338591.5 339593.25 340595 341596.75 342598.5 343600.25 344602 345603.75 346605.5 347607.25 348609 349610.75 350612.5 351614.25 352616 353617.75 354619.5 355621.25 356623 357624.75 358626.5 359628.25 360630 361631.75 362633.5 363635.25
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:23:00 - [147] - Quote Needmore Longcat wrote: I realize it's a metric that some people decry, but I always find it interesting to see a "real world equivalent" of ISK in terms of currency. Would it be possible for someone to do that? 1.5ISK>$0.067478571 3ISK>$0.134957143 4.5ISK>$0.202435714 6ISK>$0.269914286 7.5ISK>$0.337392857 9ISK>$0.404871429 10.5ISK>$0.47235 12ISK>$0.539828571 13.5ISK>$0.607307143 15ISK>$0.674785714 16.5ISK>$0.742264286 18ISK>$0.809742857 19.5ISK>$0.877221429 21ISK>$0.9447 22.5ISK>$1.012178571 24ISK>$1.079657143 25.5ISK>$1.147135714 27ISK>$1.214614286 28.5ISK>$1.282092857 30ISK>$1.349571429 31.5ISK>$1.41705 33ISK>$1.484528571 34.5ISK>$1.552007143 36ISK>$1.619485714 37.5ISK>$1.686964286 39ISK>$1.754442857 40.5ISK>$1.821921429 42ISK>$1.8894 43.5ISK>$1.956878571 45ISK>$2.024357143 46.5ISK>$2.091835714 48ISK>$2.159314286 49.5ISK>$2.226792857 51ISK>$2.294271429 52.5ISK>$2.36175 54ISK>$2.429228571 55.5ISK>$2.496707143 57ISK>$2.564185714 58.5ISK>$2.631664286 60ISK>$2.699142857 61.5ISK>$2.766621429 63ISK>$2.8341 64.5ISK>$2.901578571 66ISK>$2.969057143 67.5ISK>$3.036535714 69ISK>$3.104014286 70.5ISK>$3.171492857 72ISK>$3.238971429 73.5ISK>$3.30645 75ISK>$3.373928571 76.5ISK>$3.441407143 78ISK>$3.508885714 79.5ISK>$3.576364286 81ISK>$3.643842857 82.5ISK>$3.711321429 84ISK>$3.7788 85.5ISK>$3.846278571 87ISK>$3.913757143 88.5ISK>$3.981235714 90ISK>$4.048714286 91.5ISK>$4.116192857 93ISK>$4.183671429 94.5ISK>$4.25115 96ISK>$4.318628571 97.5ISK>$4.386107143 99ISK>$4.453585714 100.5ISK>$4.521064286 102ISK>$4.588542857 103.5ISK>$4.656021429 105ISK>$4.7235 106.5ISK>$4.790978571 108ISK>$4.858457143 109.5ISK>$4.925935714 111ISK>$4.993414286 112.5ISK>$5.060892857 114ISK>$5.128371429 115.5ISK>$5.19585 117ISK>$5.263328571 118.5ISK>$5.330807143 120ISK>$5.398285714 121.5ISK>$5.465764286 123ISK>$5.533242857 124.5ISK>$5.600721429 126ISK>$5.6682 127.5ISK>$5.735678571 129ISK>$5.803157143 130.5ISK>$5.870635714 132ISK>$5.938114286 133.5ISK>$6.005592857 135ISK>$6.073071429 136.5ISK>$6.14055 138ISK>$6.208028571 139.5ISK>$6.275507143 141ISK>$6.342985714 142.5ISK>$6.410464286 144ISK>$6.477942857 145.5ISK>$6.545421429 147ISK>$6.6129 148.5ISK>$6.680378571 150ISK>$6.747857143 151.5ISK>$6.815335714 153ISK>$6.882814286 154.5ISK>$6.950292857 156ISK>$7.017771429 157.5ISK>$7.08525 159ISK>$7.152728571 160.5ISK>$7.220207143 162ISK>$7.287685714 163.5ISK>$7.355164286 165ISK>$7.422642857 166.5ISK>$7.490121429 168ISK>$7.5576 169.5ISK>$7.625078571 171ISK>$7.692557143 172.5ISK>$7.760035714 174ISK>$7.827514286 175.5ISK>$7.894992857 177ISK>$7.962471429 178.5ISK>$8.02995 180ISK>$8.097428571 181.5ISK>$8.164907143 183ISK>$8.232385714 184.5ISK>$8.299864286 186ISK>$8.367342857 187.5ISK>$8.434821429 189ISK>$8.5023 190.5ISK>$8.569778571 192ISK>$8.637257143 193.5ISK>$8.704735714 195ISK>$8.772214286 196.5ISK>$8.839692857 198ISK>$8.907171429 199.5ISK>$8.97465 201ISK>$9.042128571 202.5ISK>$9.109607143 204ISK>$9.177085714 205.5ISK>$9.244564286 207ISK>$9.312042857 208.5ISK>$9.379521429 210ISK>$9.447 211.5ISK>$9.514478571 213ISK>$9.581957143 214.5ISK>$9.649435714 216ISK>$9.716914286 217.5ISK>$9.784392857 219ISK>$9.851871429 220.5ISK>$9.91935 222ISK>$9.986828571 223.5ISK>$10.05430714 225ISK>$10.12178571 226.5ISK>$10.18926429 228ISK>$10.25674286 229.5ISK>$10.32422143 231ISK>$10.3917 232.5ISK>$10.45917857 234ISK>$10.52665714 235.5ISK>$10.59413571 237ISK>$10.66161429 238.5ISK>$10.72909286 240ISK>$10.79657143 241.5ISK>$10.86405 243ISK>$10.93152857 244.5ISK>$10.99900714 246ISK>$11.06648571 247.5ISK>$11.13396429 249ISK>$11.20144286 250.5ISK>$11.26892143 252ISK>$11.3364 253.5ISK>$11.40387857 255ISK>$11.47135714 256.5ISK>$11.53883571 258ISK>$11.60631429 259.5ISK>$11.67379286 261ISK>$11.74127143 262.5ISK>$11.80875 264ISK>$11.87622857 265.5ISK>$11.94370714 267ISK>$12.01118571 268.5ISK>$12.07866429 270ISK>$12.14614286 271.5ISK>$12.21362143 273ISK>$12.2811 274.5ISK>$12.34857857 276ISK>$12.41605714 277.5ISK>$12.48353571 279ISK>$12.55101429 280.5ISK>$12.61849286 282ISK>$12.68597143 283.5ISK>$12.75345 285ISK>$12.82092857 286.5ISK>$12.88840714 288ISK>$12.95588571 289.5ISK>$13.02336429 291ISK>$13.09084286 292.5ISK>$13.15832143 294ISK>$13.2258 295.5ISK>$13.29327857 297ISK>$13.36075714 298.5ISK>$13.42823571 300ISK>$13.49571429 301.5ISK>$13.56319286 303ISK>$13.63067143 304.5ISK>$13.69815 306ISK>$13.76562857 307.5ISK>$13.83310714 309ISK>$13.90058571 310.5ISK>$13.96806429 312ISK>$14.03554286 313.5ISK>$14.10302143 315ISK>$14.1705 316.5ISK>$14.23797857 318ISK>$14.30545714 319.5ISK>$14.37293571 321ISK>$14.44041429 322.5ISK>$14.50789286 324ISK>$14.57537143 325.5ISK>$14.64285 327ISK>$14.71032857 328.5ISK>$14.77780714 330ISK>$14.84528571 331.5ISK>$14.91276429 333ISK>$14.98024286 334.5ISK>$15.04772143 336ISK>$15.1152 337.5ISK>$15.18267857 339ISK>$15.25015714 340.5ISK>$15.31763571 342ISK>$15.38511429 343.5ISK>$15.45259286 345ISK>$15.52007143 346.5ISK>$15.58755 348ISK>$15.65502857 349.5ISK>$15.72250714 351ISK>$15.78998571 352.5ISK>$15.85746429 354ISK>$15.92494286 355.5ISK>$15.99242143 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 98	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:23:00 - [148] - Quote More topes size comparison: Topes (old)Topes (new) 100003333.333333 100013333.666667 100023334 100033334.333333 100043334.666667 100053335 100063335.333333 100073335.666667 100083336 100093336.333333 100103336.666667 100113337 100123337.333333 100133337.666667 100143338 100153338.333333 100163338.666667 100173339 100183339.333333 100193339.666667 100203340 100213340.333333 100223340.666667 100233341 100243341.333333 100253341.666667 100263342 100273342.333333 100283342.666667 100293343 100303343.333333 100313343.666667 100323344 100333344.333333 100343344.666667 100353345 100363345.333333 100373345.666667 100383346 100393346.333333 100403346.666667 100413347 100423347.333333 100433347.666667 100443348 100453348.333333 100463348.666667 100473349 100483349.333333 100493349.666667 100503350 100513350.333333 100523350.666667 100533351 100543351.333333 100553351.666667 100563352 100573352.333333 100583352.666667 100593353 100603353.333333 100613353.666667 100623354 100633354.333333 100643354.666667 100653355 100663355.333333 100673355.666667 100683356 100693356.333333 100703356.666667 100713357 100723357.333333 100733357.666667 100743358 100753358.333333 100763358.666667 100773359 100783359.333333 100793359.666667 100803360 100813360.333333 100823360.666667 100833361 100843361.333333 100853361.666667 100863362 100873362.333333 100883362.666667 100893363 100903363.333333 100913363.666667 100923364 100933364.333333 100943364.666667 100953365 100963365.333333 100973365.666667 100983366 100993366.333333 101003366.666667 101013367 101023367.333333 101033367.666667 101043368 101053368.333333 101063368.666667 101073369 101083369.333333 101093369.666667 101103370 101113370.333333 101123370.666667 101133371 101143371.333333 101153371.666667 101163372 101173372.333333 101183372.666667 101193373 101203373.333333 101213373.666667 101223374 101233374.333333 101243374.666667 101253375 101263375.333333 101273375.666667 101283376 101293376.333333 101303376.666667 101313377 101323377.333333 101333377.666667 101343378 101353378.333333 101363378.666667 101373379 101383379.333333 101393379.666667 101403380 101413380.333333 101423380.666667 101433381 101443381.333333 101453381.666667 101463382 101473382.333333 101483382.666667 101493383 101503383.333333 101513383.666667 101523384 101533384.333333 101543384.666667 101553385 101563385.333333 101573385.666667 101583386 101593386.333333 101603386.666667 101613387 101623387.333333 101633387.666667 101643388 101653388.333333 101663388.666667 101673389 101683389.333333 101693389.666667 101703390 101713390.333333 101723390.666667 101733391 101743391.333333 101753391.666667 101763392 101773392.333333 101783392.666667 101793393 101803393.333333 101813393.666667 101823394 101833394.333333 101843394.666667 101853395 101863395.333333 101873395.666667 101883396 101893396.333333 101903396.666667 101913397 101923397.333333 101933397.666667 101943398 101953398.333333 101963398.666667 101973399 101983399.333333 101993399.666667 102003400 102013400.333333 102023400.666667 102033401 102043401.333333 102053401.666667 102063402 102073402.333333 102083402.666667 102093403 102103403.333333 102113403.666667 102123404 102133404.333333 102143404.666667 102153405 102163405.333333 102173405.666667 102183406 102193406.333333 102203406.666667 102213407 102223407.333333 102233407.666667 102243408 102253408.333333 102263408.666667 102273409 102283409.333333 102293409.666667 102303410 102313410.333333 102323410.666667 102333411 102343411.333333 102353411.666667 102363412 102373412.333333 102383412.666667 102393413 102403413.333333 102413413.666667 102423414 102433414.333333 102443414.666667 102453415 102463415.333333 102473415.666667 102483416 102493416.333333 102503416.666667 102513417 102523417.333333 102533417.666667 102543418 102553418.333333 102563418.666667 102573419 102583419.333333 102593419.666667 102603420 102613420.333333 102623420.666667 102633421 102643421.333333 102653421.666667 102663422 102673422.333333 102683422.666667 102693423 102703423.333333 102713423.666667 102723424 102733424.333333 102743424.666667 102753425 102763425.333333 102773425.666667 102783426 102793426.333333 102803426.666667 102813427 102823427.333333 102833427.666667 102843428 102853428.333333 102863428.666667 102873429 102883429.333333 102893429.666667 102903430 102913430.333333 102923430.666667 102933431 102943431.333333 102953431.666667 102963432 102973432.333333 102983432.666667 102993433 103003433.333333 103013433.666667 103023434 103033434.333333 103043434.666667 103053435 103063435.333333 103073435.666667 103083436 103093436.333333 103103436.666667 103113437 103123437.333333 103133437.666667 103143438 103153438.333333 103163438.666667 103173439 103183439.333333 103193439.666667 103203440 103213440.333333 103223440.666667 103233441 103243441.333333 103253441.666667 103263442 103273442.333333 103283442.666667 103293443 103303443.333333 103313443.666667 103323444 103333444.333333 103343444.666667 103353445 103363445.333333 103373445.666667 103383446
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 83	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:23:00 - [149] - Quote Thanks CSM for looking out for players!
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 38	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:24:00 - [150] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: Needmore Longcat wrote: I realize it's a metric that some people decry, but I always find it interesting to see a "real world equivalent" of ISK in terms of currency. Would it be possible for someone to do that? 1.5ISK>$0.067478571 3ISK>$0.134957143 4.5ISK>$0.202435714 6ISK>$0.269914286 7.5ISK>$0.337392857 9ISK>$0.404871429 10.5ISK>$0.47235 12ISK>$0.539828571 13.5ISK>$0.607307143 15ISK>$0.674785714 16.5ISK>$0.742264286 18ISK>$0.809742857 19.5ISK>$0.877221429 21ISK>$0.9447 22.5ISK>$1.012178571 24ISK>$1.079657143 25.5ISK>$1.147135714 27ISK>$1.214614286 28.5ISK>$1.282092857 30ISK>$1.349571429 31.5ISK>$1.41705 33ISK>$1.484528571 34.5ISK>$1.552007143 36ISK>$1.619485714 37.5ISK>$1.686964286 39ISK>$1.754442857 40.5ISK>$1.821921429 42ISK>$1.8894 43.5ISK>$1.956878571 45ISK>$2.024357143 46.5ISK>$2.091835714 48ISK>$2.159314286 49.5ISK>$2.226792857 51ISK>$2.294271429 52.5ISK>$2.36175 54ISK>$2.429228571 55.5ISK>$2.496707143 57ISK>$2.564185714 58.5ISK>$2.631664286 60ISK>$2.699142857 61.5ISK>$2.766621429 63ISK>$2.8341 64.5ISK>$2.901578571 66ISK>$2.969057143 67.5ISK>$3.036535714 69ISK>$3.104014286 70.5ISK>$3.171492857 72ISK>$3.238971429 73.5ISK>$3.30645 75ISK>$3.373928571 76.5ISK>$3.441407143 78ISK>$3.508885714 79.5ISK>$3.576364286 81ISK>$3.643842857 82.5ISK>$3.711321429 84ISK>$3.7788 85.5ISK>$3.846278571 87ISK>$3.913757143 88.5ISK>$3.981235714 90ISK>$4.048714286 91.5ISK>$4.116192857 93ISK>$4.183671429 94.5ISK>$4.25115 96ISK>$4.318628571 97.5ISK>$4.386107143 99ISK>$4.453585714 100.5ISK>$4.521064286 102ISK>$4.588542857 103.5ISK>$4.656021429 105ISK>$4.7235 106.5ISK>$4.790978571 108ISK>$4.858457143 109.5ISK>$4.925935714 111ISK>$4.993414286 112.5ISK>$5.060892857 114ISK>$5.128371429 115.5ISK>$5.19585 117ISK>$5.263328571 118.5ISK>$5.330807143 120ISK>$5.398285714 121.5ISK>$5.465764286 123ISK>$5.533242857 124.5ISK>$5.600721429 126ISK>$5.6682 127.5ISK>$5.735678571 129ISK>$5.803157143 130.5ISK>$5.870635714 132ISK>$5.938114286 133.5ISK>$6.005592857 135ISK>$6.073071429 136.5ISK>$6.14055 138ISK>$6.208028571 139.5ISK>$6.275507143 141ISK>$6.342985714 142.5ISK>$6.410464286 144ISK>$6.477942857 145.5ISK>$6.545421429 147ISK>$6.6129 148.5ISK>$6.680378571 150ISK>$6.747857143 151.5ISK>$6.815335714 153ISK>$6.882814286 154.5ISK>$6.950292857 156ISK>$7.017771429 157.5ISK>$7.08525 159ISK>$7.152728571 160.5ISK>$7.220207143 162ISK>$7.287685714 163.5ISK>$7.355164286 165ISK>$7.422642857 166.5ISK>$7.490121429 168ISK>$7.5576 169.5ISK>$7.625078571 171ISK>$7.692557143 172.5ISK>$7.760035714 174ISK>$7.827514286 175.5ISK>$7.894992857 177ISK>$7.962471429 178.5ISK>$8.02995 180ISK>$8.097428571 181.5ISK>$8.164907143 183ISK>$8.232385714 184.5ISK>$8.299864286 186ISK>$8.367342857 187.5ISK>$8.434821429 189ISK>$8.5023 190.5ISK>$8.569778571 192ISK>$8.637257143 193.5ISK>$8.704735714 195ISK>$8.772214286 196.5ISK>$8.839692857 198ISK>$8.907171429 199.5ISK>$8.97465 201ISK>$9.042128571 202.5ISK>$9.109607143 204ISK>$9.177085714 205.5ISK>$9.244564286 207ISK>$9.312042857 208.5ISK>$9.379521429 210ISK>$9.447 211.5ISK>$9.514478571 213ISK>$9.581957143 214.5ISK>$9.649435714 216ISK>$9.716914286 217.5ISK>$9.784392857 219ISK>$9.851871429 220.5ISK>$9.91935 222ISK>$9.986828571 223.5ISK>$10.05430714 225ISK>$10.12178571 226.5ISK>$10.18926429 228ISK>$10.25674286 229.5ISK>$10.32422143 231ISK>$10.3917 232.5ISK>$10.45917857 234ISK>$10.52665714 235.5ISK>$10.59413571 237ISK>$10.66161429 238.5ISK>$10.72909286 240ISK>$10.79657143 241.5ISK>$10.86405 243ISK>$10.93152857 244.5ISK>$10.99900714 246ISK>$11.06648571 247.5ISK>$11.13396429 249ISK>$11.20144286 250.5ISK>$11.26892143 252ISK>$11.3364 253.5ISK>$11.40387857 255ISK>$11.47135714 256.5ISK>$11.53883571 258ISK>$11.60631429 259.5ISK>$11.67379286 261ISK>$11.74127143 262.5ISK>$11.80875 264ISK>$11.87622857 265.5ISK>$11.94370714 267ISK>$12.01118571 268.5ISK>$12.07866429 270ISK>$12.14614286 271.5ISK>$12.21362143 273ISK>$12.2811 274.5ISK>$12.34857857 276ISK>$12.41605714 277.5ISK>$12.48353571 279ISK>$12.55101429 280.5ISK>$12.61849286 282ISK>$12.68597143 283.5ISK>$12.75345 285ISK>$12.82092857 286.5ISK>$12.88840714 288ISK>$12.95588571 289.5ISK>$13.02336429 291ISK>$13.09084286 292.5ISK>$13.15832143 294ISK>$13.2258 295.5ISK>$13.29327857 297ISK>$13.36075714 298.5ISK>$13.42823571 300ISK>$13.49571429 301.5ISK>$13.56319286 303ISK>$13.63067143 304.5ISK>$13.69815 306ISK>$13.76562857 307.5ISK>$13.83310714 309ISK>$13.90058571 310.5ISK>$13.96806429 312ISK>$14.03554286 313.5ISK>$14.10302143 315ISK>$14.1705 316.5ISK>$14.23797857 318ISK>$14.30545714 319.5ISK>$14.37293571 321ISK>$14.44041429 322.5ISK>$14.50789286 324ISK>$14.57537143 325.5ISK>$14.64285 327ISK>$14.71032857 328.5ISK>$14.77780714 330ISK>$14.84528571 331.5ISK>$14.91276429 333ISK>$14.98024286 334.5ISK>$15.04772143 336ISK>$15.1152 337.5ISK>$15.18267857 339ISK>$15.25015714 340.5ISK>$15.31763571 342ISK>$15.38511429 343.5ISK>$15.45259286 345ISK>$15.52007143 346.5ISK>$15.58755 348ISK>$15.65502857 349.5ISK>$15.72250714 351ISK>$15.78998571 352.5ISK>$15.85746429 354ISK>$...
Letseatlunch Crimson Wraiths 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:24:00 - [151] - Quote I guess I wont be doing any small gang blops ops any more :/ thanks fozzie
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 386	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:25:00 - [152] - Quote XavierVE wrote: Grarr Dexx wrote: Another member of CCP showing off that you don't necessarily need brains to get a job in Iceland. He really is the dumbest, isn't he? I haven't seen a single post by Fozzie that was well-thought out, nor a change that really made sense. The game is just as imbalanced prior to his hiring, in some ways, moreso. This is such a stupid change. "We'd like to spur null sec industry! Oh, by the way, now your JF runs cost 50% so you can't import materials as cheaply to do that null-sec industry!" That's really smart, given that the main limitation on any null region is that you only have access to a limited amount of moon material natively. To think that isotope prices will go DOWN because "more people will be mining ice" is also pretty dunderheaded. Take an economics class sometime. ******* intelligent. The last MMO I played extensively was ruined when the developer went cheap-o and hired "devs" who could do nothing but change numbers. CCP has made the same mistake with this clown. All he can do is randomly change numbers, he can't develop actual content. Wouldn't be so bad if he had any sort of long-term vision of the kinds of unintended consequences his inept additions to the game actually cause. CCP Fozzie please increase jump fuel consumption by 5000000% for people named "XavierVE"
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 218	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:25:00 - [153] - Quote Kat Ayclism wrote: Quote: I appre ciate this explan ation for those who ca nnot grasp what a 5 0% increase would look like num erically. For those that cannot gra sp th is, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5<...
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:26:00 - [154] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: Needmore Longcat wrote: I realize it's a metric that some people decry, but I always find it interesting to see a "real world equivalent" of ISK in terms of currency. Would it be possible for someone to do that? isk price in millions (1.5 isk = 1.5m isk) 1.5ISK>$0.067478571 3ISK>$0.134957143 4.5ISK>$0.202435714 6ISK>$0.269914286 7.5ISK>$0.337392857 9ISK>$0.404871429 10.5ISK>$0.47235 12ISK>$0.539828571 13.5ISK>$0.607307143 15ISK>$0.674785714 16.5ISK>$0.742264286 18ISK>$0.809742857 19.5ISK>$0.877221429 21ISK>$0.9447 22.5ISK>$1.012178571 24ISK>$1.079657143 25.5ISK>$1.147135714 27ISK>$1.214614286 28.5ISK>$1.282092857 30ISK>$1.349571429 31.5ISK>$1.41705 33ISK>$1.484528571 34.5ISK>$1.552007143 36ISK>$1.619485714 37.5ISK>$1.686964286 39ISK>$1.754442857 40.5ISK>$1.821921429 42ISK>$1.8894 43.5ISK>$1.956878571 45ISK>$2.024357143 46.5ISK>$2.091835714 48ISK>$2.159314286 49.5ISK>$2.226792857 51ISK>$2.294271429 52.5ISK>$2.36175 54ISK>$2.429228571 55.5ISK>$2.496707143 57ISK>$2.564185714 58.5ISK>$2.631664286 60ISK>$2.699142857 61.5ISK>$2.766621429 63ISK>$2.8341 64.5ISK>$2.901578571 66ISK>$2.969057143 67.5ISK>$3.036535714 69ISK>$3.104014286 70.5ISK>$3.171492857 72ISK>$3.238971429 73.5ISK>$3.30645 75ISK>$3.373928571 76.5ISK>$3.441407143 78ISK>$3.508885714 79.5ISK>$3.576364286 81ISK>$3.643842857 82.5ISK>$3.711321429 84ISK>$3.7788 85.5ISK>$3.846278571 87ISK>$3.913757143 88.5ISK>$3.981235714 90ISK>$4.048714286 91.5ISK>$4.116192857 93ISK>$4.183671429 94.5ISK>$4.25115 96ISK>$4.318628571 97.5ISK>$4.386107143 99ISK>$4.453585714 100.5ISK>$4.521064286 102ISK>$4.588542857 103.5ISK>$4.656021429 105ISK>$4.7235 106.5ISK>$4.790978571 108ISK>$4.858457143 109.5ISK>$4.925935714 111ISK>$4.993414286 112.5ISK>$5.060892857 114ISK>$5.128371429 115.5ISK>$5.19585 117ISK>$5.263328571 118.5ISK>$5.330807143 120ISK>$5.398285714 121.5ISK>$5.465764286 123ISK>$5.533242857 124.5ISK>$5.600721429 126ISK>$5.6682 127.5ISK>$5.735678571 129ISK>$5.803157143 130.5ISK>$5.870635714 132ISK>$5.938114286 133.5ISK>$6.005592857 135ISK>$6.073071429 136.5ISK>$6.14055 138ISK>$6.208028571 139.5ISK>$6.275507143 141ISK>$6.342985714 142.5ISK>$6.410464286 144ISK>$6.477942857 145.5ISK>$6.545421429 147ISK>$6.6129 148.5ISK>$6.680378571 150ISK>$6.747857143 151.5ISK>$6.815335714 153ISK>$6.882814286 154.5ISK>$6.950292857 156ISK>$7.017771429 157.5ISK>$7.08525 159ISK>$7.152728571 160.5ISK>$7.220207143 162ISK>$7.287685714 163.5ISK>$7.355164286 165ISK>$7.422642857 166.5ISK>$7.490121429 168ISK>$7.5576 169.5ISK>$7.625078571 171ISK>$7.692557143 172.5ISK>$7.760035714 174ISK>$7.827514286 175.5ISK>$7.894992857 177ISK>$7.962471429 178.5ISK>$8.02995 180ISK>$8.097428571 181.5ISK>$8.164907143 183ISK>$8.232385714 184.5ISK>$8.299864286 186ISK>$8.367342857 187.5ISK>$8.434821429 189ISK>$8.5023 190.5ISK>$8.569778571 192ISK>$8.637257143 193.5ISK>$8.704735714 195ISK>$8.772214286 196.5ISK>$8.839692857 198ISK>$8.907171429 199.5ISK>$8.97465 201ISK>$9.042128571 202.5ISK>$9.109607143 204ISK>$9.177085714 205.5ISK>$9.244564286 207ISK>$9.312042857 208.5ISK>$9.379521429 210ISK>$9.447 211.5ISK>$9.514478571 213ISK>$9.581957143 214.5ISK>$9.649435714 216ISK>$9.716914286 217.5ISK>$9.784392857 219ISK>$9.851871429 220.5ISK>$9.91935 222ISK>$9.986828571 223.5ISK>$10.05430714 225ISK>$10.12178571 226.5ISK>$10.18926429 228ISK>$10.25674286 229.5ISK>$10.32422143 231ISK>$10.3917 232.5ISK>$10.45917857 234ISK>$10.52665714 235.5ISK>$10.59413571 237ISK>$10.66161429 238.5ISK>$10.72909286 240ISK>$10.79657143 241.5ISK>$10.86405 243ISK>$10.93152857 244.5ISK>$10.99900714 246ISK>$11.06648571 247.5ISK>$11.13396429 249ISK>$11.20144286 250.5ISK>$11.26892143 252ISK>$11.3364 253.5ISK>$11.40387857 255ISK>$11.47135714 256.5ISK>$11.53883571 258ISK>$11.60631429 259.5ISK>$11.67379286 261ISK>$11.74127143 262.5ISK>$11.80875 264ISK>$11.87622857 265.5ISK>$11.94370714 267ISK>$12.01118571 268.5ISK>$12.07866429 270ISK>$12.14614286 271.5ISK>$12.21362143 273ISK>$12.2811 274.5ISK>$12.34857857 276ISK>$12.41605714 277.5ISK>$12.48353571 279ISK>$12.55101429 280.5ISK>$12.61849286 282ISK>$12.68597143 283.5ISK>$12.75345 285ISK>$12.82092857 286.5ISK>$12.88840714 288ISK>$12.95588571 289.5ISK>$13.02336429 291ISK>$13.09084286 292.5ISK>$13.15832143 294ISK>$13.2258 295.5ISK>$13.29327857 297ISK>$13.36075714 298.5ISK>$13.42823571 300ISK>$13.49571429 301.5ISK>$13.56319286 303ISK>$13.63067143 304.5ISK>$13.69815 306ISK>$13.76562857 307.5ISK>$13.83310714 309ISK>$13.90058571 310.5ISK>$13.96806429 312ISK>$14.03554286 313.5ISK>$14.10302143 315ISK>$14.1705 316.5ISK>$14.23797857 318ISK>$14.30545714 319.5ISK>$14.37293571 321ISK>$14.44041429 322.5ISK>$14.50789286 324ISK>$14.57537143 325.5ISK>$14.64285 327ISK>$14.71032857 328.5ISK>$14.77780714 330ISK>$14.84528571 331.5ISK>$14.91276429 333ISK>$14.98024286 334.5ISK>$15.04772143 336ISK>$15.1152 337.5ISK>$15.18267857 339ISK>$15.25015714 340.5ISK>$15.31763571 342ISK>$15.38511429 343.5ISK>$15.45259286 345ISK>$15.52007143 346.5ISK>$15.58755 348ISK>$15.65502857 349.5ISK>$15.72250714 ple...
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 746	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:26:00 - [155] - Quote Letseatlunch wrote: I guess I wont be doing any small gang blops ops any more :/ thanks fozzie Be less poor .
TownSaver Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 114	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:27:00 - [156] - Quote ZehNarume wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: MissBolyai wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 2...
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 41	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:28:00 - [157] - Quote nerf forums
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:28:00 - [158] - Quote TownSaver wrote: ZehNarume wrote: Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 50% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 22... https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Kyt Thrace Lightspeed Enterprises Fidelas Constans 418	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:28:00 - [159] - Quote I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? R.I.P. Vile Rat
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 453	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:29:00 - [160] - Quote I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 84	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:29:00 - [161] - Quote In all seriousness, not trolling or trying to be nasty at all. Why can we not work on the things that have been broken for literally 10 years, before we start changing mechanisms that work at least somewhat well at the moment? POS comes to mind, for one...
1Robert McNamara1 The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 54	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:30:00 - [162] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. This nerf disproportionately effects BLOPS fleets over capitals.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 453	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:30:00 - [163] - Quote Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? Before: A jump takes 1000 topes. At 0.15 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 After: A jump takes 1500 topes. At 0.10 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:30:00 - [164] - Quote Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? I dont understand - please use more numbers to represent your argument
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 41	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:30:00 - [165] - Quote Querns wrote: I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground.I think you've all successfully ran the
penifSMASH ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 388	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:30:00 - [166] - Quote Querns wrote: I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground. You've successfully ran the "make terrible posts on internet forums" thing into the ground
TownSaver Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 114	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:31:00 - [167] - Quote Kat Ayclism wrote: Kat Ayclism wrote: Quote: I appreciate this explanation for those who cannot grasp what a 5 0% increase would look like numerically. For those that cannot grasp this, here's a chart: Old jump cost (in millions)New jump cost (in millions) 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 186279 187280.5 188282 189283.5 190285 191286.5 192288 193289.5 194291 195292.5 196294 197295.5 198297 199298.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 261391.5 262393 263394.5 264396 265397.5 266399 267400.5 268402 269403.5 I'm not sure I get it I think it's the old cost times 1.75 but I'm not sure, so I did it in excel to check, it's actually old cost x 1.5 and gives 11.5 23 34.5 46 57.5 69 710.5 812 913.5 1015 1116.5 1218 1319.5 1421 1522.5 1624 1725.5 1827 1928.5 2030 2131.5 2233 2334.5 2436 2537.5 2639 2740.5 2842 2943.5 3045 3146.5 3248 3349.5 3451 3552.5 3654 3755.5 3857 3958.5 4060 4161.5 4263 4364.5 4466 4567.5 4669 4770.5 4872 4973.5 5075 5176.5 5278 5379.5 5481 5582.5 5684 5785.5 5887 5988.5 6090 6191.5 6293 6394.5 6496 6597.5 6699 67100.5 68102 69103.5 70105 71106.5 72108 73109.5 74111 75112.5 76114 77115.5 78117 79118.5 80120 81121.5 82123 83124.5 84126 85127.5 86129 87130.5 88132 89133.5 90135 91136.5 92138 93139.5 94141 95142.5 96144 97145.5 98147 99148.5 100150 101151.5 102153 103154.5 104156 105157.5 106159 107160.5 108162 109163.5 110165 111166.5 112168 113169.5 114171 115172.5 116174 117175.5 118177 119178.5 120180 121181.5 122183 123184.5 124186 125187.5 126189 127190.5 128192 129193.5 130195 131196.5 132198 133199.5 134201 135202.5 136204 137205.5 138207 139208.5 140210 141211.5 142213 143214.5 144216 145217.5 146219 147220.5 148222 149223.5 150225 151226.5 152228 153229.5 154231 155232.5 156234 157235.5 158237 159238.5 160240 161241.5 162243 163244.5 164246 165247.5 166249 167250.5 168252 169253.5 170255 171256.5 172258 173259.5 174261 175262.5 176264 177265.5 178267 179268.5 180270 181271.5 182273 183274.5 184276 185277.5 200300 201301.5 202303 203304.5 204306 205307.5 206309 207310.5 208312 209313.5 210315 211316.5 212318 213319.5 214321 215322.5 216324 217325.5 218327 219328.5 220330 221331.5 222333 223334.5 224336 225337.5 226339 227340.5 228342 229343.5 230345 231346.5 232348 233349.5 234351 235352.5 236354 237355.5 238357 239358.5 240360 241361.5 242363 243364.5 244366 245367.5 246369 247370.5 248372 249373.5 250375 251376.5 252378 253379.5 254381 255382.5 256384 257385.5 258387 259388.5 260390 2...
ZehNarume Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:31:00 - [168] - Quote Querns wrote: Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? Before: A jump takes 1000 topes. At 0.15 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 After: A jump takes 1500 topes. At 0.10 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 Can you do this for 100 topes to 30,000 topes in 100 tope increments? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2427385 - TS, Mumble & Webhosting -áfor iskies! :3
Phroon Thoom Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:32:00 - [169] - Quote Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? Think of it this way, a 100m3 cargo hold currently can hold a maximum of 666 isotopes. After the change that 100m3 will be able to hold 1000 isotopes, a 50% increase. Exactly equal to the usage change.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 444	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:32:00 - [170] - Quote Querns wrote: I think you've all successfully ran the whole "quoting long posts of meaningless numbers" thing into the ground. In before Ezwal locks the topic because he cannot keep up with shortening quotes.
Kyt Thrace Lightspeed Enterprises Fidelas Constans 418	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:33:00 - [171] - Quote Querns wrote: Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? Before: A jump takes 1000 topes. At 0.15 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 After: A jump takes 1500 topes. At 0.10 m^3 per tope, that is 150 m^3 Thanks, makes sense now. R.I.P. Vile Rat
Tarsas Phage Freight Club 280	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:34:00 - [172] - Quote I have provided ISK to RL cost in terms of Kuwaiti Dinars below OLD COST ISKNEW COST ISKOLD COST DINARNEW COST DINAR 11.5din0.000din0.001 23din0.001din0.002 34.5din0.001din0.003 46din0.002din0.003 57.5din0.002din0.004 69din0.003din0.005 710.5din0.003din0.005 812din0.004din0.006 913.5din0.004din0.007 1015din0.004din0.007 1116.5din0.005din0.008 1218din0.005din0.009 1319.5din0.006din0.009 1421din0.006din0.010 1522.5din0.007din0.011 1624din0.007din0.011 1725.5din0.008din0.012 1827din0.008din0.013 1928.5din0.009din0.013 2030din0.009din0.014 2131.5din0.009din0.015 2233din0.010din0.015 2334.5din0.010din0.016 2436din0.011din0.017 2537.5din0.011din0.017 2639din0.012din0.018 2740.5din0.012din0.019 2842din0.013din0.019 2943.5din0.013din0.020 3045din0.013din0.021 3146.5din0.014din0.021 3248din0.014din0.022 3349.5din0.015din0.023 3451din0.015din0.024 3552.5din0.016din0.024 3654din0.016din0.025 3755.5din0.017din0.026 3857din0.017din0.026 3958.5din0.017din0.027 4060din0.018din0.028 4161.5din0.018din0.028 4263din0.019din0.029 4364.5din0.019din0.030 4466din0.020din0.030 4567.5din0.020din0.031 4669din0.021din0.032 4770.5din0.021din0.032 4872din0.021din0.033 4973.5din0.022din0.034 5075din0.022din0.034 5176.5din0.023din0.035 5278din0.023din0.036 5379.5din0.024din0.036 5481din0.024din0.037 5582.5din0.025din0.038 5684din0.025din0.038 5785.5din0.026din0.039 5887din0.026din0.040 5988.5din0.026din0.040 6090din0.027din0.041 6191.5din0.027din0.042 6293din0.028din0.042 6394.5din0.028din0.043 6496din0.029din0.044 6597.5din0.029din0.044 6699din0.030din0.045 67100.5din0.030din0.046 68102din0.030din0.046 69103.5din0.031din0.047 70105din0.031din0.048 71106.5din0.032din0.048 72108din0.032din0.049 73109.5din0.033din0.050 74111din0.033din0.050 75112.5din0.034din0.051 76114din0.034din0.052 77115.5din0.034din0.052 78117din0.035din0.053 79118.5din0.035din0.054 80120din0.036din0.054 81121.5din0.036din0.055 82123din0.037din0.056 83124.5din0.037din0.056 84126din0.038din0.057 85127.5din0.038din0.058 86129din0.039din0.058 87130.5din0.039din0.059 88132din0.039din0.060 89133.5din0.040din0.060 90135din0.040din0.061 91136.5din0.041din0.062 92138din0.041din0.062 93139.5din0.042din0.063 94141din0.042din0.064 95142.5din0.043din0.064 96144din0.043din0.065 97145.5din0.043din0.066 98147din0.044din0.066 99148.5din0.044din0.067 100150din0.045din0.068 101151.5din0.045din0.069 102153din0.046din0.069 103154.5din0.046din0.070 104156din0.047din0.071 105157.5din0.047din0.071 106159din0.047din0.072 107160.5din0.048din0.073 108162din0.048din0.073 109163.5din0.049din0.074 110165din0.049din0.075 111166.5din0.050din0.075 112168din0.050din0.076 113169.5din0.051din0.077 114171din0.051din0.077 115172.5din0.051din0.078 116174din0.052din0.079 117175.5din0.052din0.079 118177din0.053din0.080 119178.5din0.053din0.081 120180din0.054din0.081 121181.5din0.054din0.082 122183din0.055din0.083 123184.5din0.055din0.083 124186din0.056din0.084 125187.5din0.056din0.085 126189din0.056din0.085 127190.5din0.057din0.086 128192din0.057din0.087 129193.5din0.058din0.087 130195din0.058din0.088 131196.5din0.059din0.089 132198din0.059din0.089 133199.5din0.060din0.090 134201din0.060din0.091 135202.5din0.060din0.091 136204din0.061din0.092 137205.5din0.061din0.093 138207din0.062din0.093 139208.5din0.062din0.094 140210din0.063din0.095 141211.5din0.063din0.095 142213din0.064din0.096 143214.5din0.064din0.097 144216din0.064din0.097 145217.5din0.065din0.098 146219din0.065din0.099 147220.5din0.066din0.099 148222din0.066din0.100 149223.5din0.067din0.101 150225din0.067din0.101 151226.5din0.068din0.102 152228din0.068din0.103 153229.5din0.069din0.103 154231din0.069din0.104 155232.5din0.069din0.105 156234din0.070din0.105 157235.5din0.070din0.106 158237din0.071din0.107 159238.5din0.071din0.107 160240din0.072din0.108 161241.5din0.072din0.109 162243din0.073din0.109 163244.5din0.073din0.110 164246din0.073din0.111 165247.5din0.074din0.111 166249din0.074din0.112 167250.5din0.075din0.113 168252din0.075din0.114 169253.5din0.076din0.114 170255din0.076din0.115 171256.5din0.077din0.116 172258din0.077din0.116 173259.5din0.077din0.117 174261din0.078din0.118 175262.5din0.078din0.118 176264din0.079din0.119 177265.5din0.079din0.120 178267din0.080din0.120 179268.5din0.080din0.121 180270din0.081din0.122 181271.5din0.081din0.122 182273din0.081din0.123 183274.5din0.082din0.124 184276din0.082din0.124 185277.5din0.083din0.125 186279din0.083din0.126 187280.5din0.084din0.126 188282din0.084din0.127 189283.5din0.085din0.128 190285din0.085din0.128 191286.5din0.086din0.129 192288din0.086din0.130 193289.5din0.086din0.130 194291din0.087din0.131 195292.5din0.087din0.132 196294din0.088din0.132 197295.5din0.088din0.133 198297din0.089din0.134 199298.5din0.089din0.134 200300din0.090din0.135 201301.5din0.090din0.136 202303din0.090din0.136 203304.5din0.091din0.137
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:35:00 - [173] - Quote "We are going to make it more expensive so people jumps/bridges less" This is a correlation vs causation fallacy.
ovenproofjet Screaming Angels Ineluctable. 79	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:35:00 - [174] - Quote It would seem I have to go to Reddit now to get a reasonable discussion of new changes these days.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 41	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:35:00 - [175] - Quote Tarsas Phage wrote: I have provided ISK to RL cost in terms of Kuwaiti Dinars below OLD COST ISKNEW COST ISKOLD COST DINARNEW COST DINAR 11.5din0.000din0.001 23din0.001din0.002 34.5din0.001din0.003 46din0.002din0.003 57.5din0.002din0.004 69din0.003din0.005 710.5din0.003din0.005 812din0.004din0.006 913.5din0.004din0.007 1015din0.004din0.007 1116.5din0.005din0.008 1218din0.005din0.009 1319.5din0.006din0.009 1421din0.006din0.010 1522.5din0.007din0.011 1624din0.007din0.011 1725.5din0.008din0.012 1827din0.008din0.013 1928.5din0.009din0.013 2030din0.009din0.014 2131.5din0.009din0.015 2233din0.010din0.015 2334.5din0.010din0.016 2436din0.011din0.017 2537.5din0.011din0.017 2639din0.012din0.018 2740.5din0.012din0.019 2842din0.013din0.019 2943.5din0.013din0.020 3045din0.013din0.021 3146.5din0.014din0.021 3248din0.014din0.022 3349.5din0.015din0.023 3451din0.015din0.024 3552.5din0.016din0.024 3654din0.016din0.025 3755.5din0.017din0.026 3857din0.017din0.026 3958.5din0.017din0.027 4060din0.018din0.028 4161.5din0.018din0.028 4263din0.019din0.029 4364.5din0.019din0.030 4466din0.020din0.030 4567.5din0.020din0.031 4669din0.021din0.032 4770.5din0.021din0.032 4872din0.021din0.033 4973.5din0.022din0.034 5075din0.022din0.034 5176.5din0.023din0.035 5278din0.023din0.036 5379.5din0.024din0.036 5481din0.024din0.037 5582.5din0.025din0.038 5684din0.025din0.038 5785.5din0.026din0.039 5887din0.026din0.040 5988.5din0.026din0.040 6090din0.027din0.041 6191.5din0.027din0.042 6293din0.028din0.042 6394.5din0.028din0.043 6496din0.029din0.044 6597.5din0.029din0.044 6699din0.030din0.045 67100.5din0.030din0.046 68102din0.030din0.046 69103.5din0.031din0.047 70105din0.031din0.048 71106.5din0.032din0.048 72108din0.032din0.049 73109.5din0.033din0.050 74111din0.033din0.050 75112.5din0.034din0.051 76114din0.034din0.052 77115.5din0.034din0.052 78117din0.035din0.053 79118.5din0.035din0.054 80120din0.036din0.054 81121.5din0.036din0.055 82123din0.037din0.056 83124.5din0.037din0.056 84126din0.038din0.057 85127.5din0.038din0.058 86129din0.039din0.058 87130.5din0.039din0.059 88132din0.039din0.060 89133.5din0.040din0.060 90135din0.040din0.061 91136.5din0.041din0.062 92138din0.041din0.062 93139.5din0.042din0.063 94141din0.042din0.064 95142.5din0.043din0.064 96144din0.043din0.065 97145.5din0.043din0.066 98147din0.044din0.066 99148.5din0.044din0.067 100150din0.045din0.068 101151.5din0.045din0.069 102153din0.046din0.069 103154.5din0.046din0.070 104156din0.047din0.071 105157.5din0.047din0.071 106159din0.047din0.072 107160.5din0.048din0.073 108162din0.048din0.073 109163.5din0.049din0.074 110165din0.049din0.075 111166.5din0.050din0.075 112168din0.050din0.076 113169.5din0.051din0.077 114171din0.051din0.077 115172.5din0.051din0.078 116174din0.052din0.079 117175.5din0.052din0.079 118177din0.053din0.080 119178.5din0.053din0.081 120180din0.054din0.081 121181.5din0.054din0.082 122183din0.055din0.083 123184.5din0.055din0.083 124186din0.056din0.084 125187.5din0.056din0.085 126189din0.056din0.085 127190.5din0.057din0.086 128192din0.057din0.087 129193.5din0.058din0.087 130195din0.058din0.088 131196.5din0.059din0.089 132198din0.059din0.089 133199.5din0.060din0.090 134201din0.060din0.091 135202.5din0.060din0.091 136204din0.061din0.092 137205.5din0.061din0.093 138207din0.062din0.093 139208.5din0.062din0.094 140210din0.063din0.095 141211.5din0.063din0.095 142213din0.064din0.096 143214.5din0.064din0.097 144216din0.064din0.097 145217.5din0.065din0.098 146219din0.065din0.099 147220.5din0.066din0.099 148222din0.066din0.100 149223.5din0.067din0.101 150225din0.067din0.101 151226.5din0.068din0.102 152228din0.068din0.103 153229.5din0.069din0.103 154231din0.069din0.104 155232.5din0.069din0.105 156234din0.070din0.105 157235.5din0.070din0.106 158237din0.071din0.107 159238.5din0.071din0.107 160240din0.072din0.108 161241.5din0.072din0.109 162243din0.073din0.109 163244.5din0.073din0.110 164246din0.073din0.111 165247.5din0.074din0.111 166249din0.074din0.112 167250.5din0.075din0.113 168252din0.075din0.114 169253.5din0.076din0.114 170255din0.076din0.115 171256.5din0.077din0.116 172258din0.077din0.116 173259.5din0.077din0.117 174261din0.078din0.118 175262.5din0.078din0.118 176264din0.079din0.119 177265.5din0.079din0.120 178267din0.080din0.120 179268.5din0.080din0.121 180270din0.081din0.122 181271.5din0.081din0.122 182273din0.081din0.123 183274.5din0.082din0.124 184276din0.082din0.124 185277.5din0.083din0.125 186279din0.083din0.126 187280.5din0.084din0.126 188282din0.084din0.127 189283.5din0.085din0.128 190285din0.085din0.128 191286.5din0.086din0.129 192288din0.086din0.130 193289.5din0.086din0.130 194291din0.087din0.131 195292.5din0.087din0.132 196294din0.088din0.132 197295.5din0.088din0.133 198297din0.089din0.134 199298.5din0.089din0.134 200300din0.090din0.135 201301.5din0.090din0.136 202303din0.090din0.136 203304.5din0.091din0.137 I like this
tobs Hostile. PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:35:00 - [176] - Quote Tarsas Phage wrote: I have provided ISK to RL cost in terms of Kuwaiti Dinars below OLD COST ISKNEW COST ISKOLD COST DINARNEW COST DINAR 11.5din0.000din0.001 23din0.001din0.002 34.5din0.001din0.003 46din0.002din0.003 57.5din0.002din0.004 69din0.003din0.005 710.5din0.003din0.005 812din0.004din0.006 913.5din0.004din0.007 1015din0.004din0.007 1116.5din0.005din0.008 1218din0.005din0.009 1319.5din0.006din0.009 1421din0.006din0.010 1522.5din0.007din0.011 1624din0.007din0.011 1725.5din0.008din0.012 1827din0.008din0.013 1928.5din0.009din0.013 2030din0.009din0.014 2131.5din0.009din0.015 2233din0.010din0.015 2334.5din0.010din0.016 2436din0.011din0.017 2537.5din0.011din0.017 2639din0.012din0.018 2740.5din0.012din0.019 2842din0.013din0.019 2943.5din0.013din0.020 3045din0.013din0.021 3146.5din0.014din0.021 3248din0.014din0.022 3349.5din0.015din0.023 3451din0.015din0.024 3552.5din0.016din0.024 3654din0.016din0.025 3755.5din0.017din0.026 3857din0.017din0.026 3958.5din0.017din0.027 4060din0.018din0.028 4161.5din0.018din0.028 4263din0.019din0.029 4364.5din0.019din0.030 4466din0.020din0.030 4567.5din0.020din0.031 4669din0.021din0.032 4770.5din0.021din0.032 4872din0.021din0.033 4973.5din0.022din0.034 5075din0.022din0.034 5176.5din0.023din0.035 5278din0.023din0.036 5379.5din0.024din0.036 5481din0.024din0.037 5582.5din0.025din0.038 5684din0.025din0.038 5785.5din0.026din0.039 5887din0.026din0.040 5988.5din0.026din0.040 6090din0.027din0.041 6191.5din0.027din0.042 6293din0.028din0.042 6394.5din0.028din0.043 6496din0.029din0.044 6597.5din0.029din0.044 6699din0.030din0.045 67100.5din0.030din0.046 68102din0.030din0.046 69103.5din0.031din0.047 70105din0.031din0.048 71106.5din0.032din0.048 72108din0.032din0.049 73109.5din0.033din0.050 74111din0.033din0.050 75112.5din0.034din0.051 76114din0.034din0.052 77115.5din0.034din0.052 78117din0.035din0.053 79118.5din0.035din0.054 80120din0.036din0.054 81121.5din0.036din0.055 82123din0.037din0.056 83124.5din0.037din0.056 84126din0.038din0.057 85127.5din0.038din0.058 86129din0.039din0.058 87130.5din0.039din0.059 88132din0.039din0.060 89133.5din0.040din0.060 90135din0.040din0.061 91136.5din0.041din0.062 92138din0.041din0.062 93139.5din0.042din0.063 94141din0.042din0.064 95142.5din0.043din0.064 96144din0.043din0.065 97145.5din0.043din0.066 98147din0.044din0.066 99148.5din0.044din0.067 100150din0.045din0.068 101151.5din0.045din0.069 102153din0.046din0.069 103154.5din0.046din0.070 104156din0.047din0.071 105157.5din0.047din0.071 106159din0.047din0.072 107160.5din0.048din0.073 108162din0.048din0.073 109163.5din0.049din0.074 110165din0.049din0.075 111166.5din0.050din0.075 112168din0.050din0.076 113169.5din0.051din0.077 114171din0.051din0.077 115172.5din0.051din0.078 116174din0.052din0.079 117175.5din0.052din0.079 118177din0.053din0.080 119178.5din0.053din0.081 120180din0.054din0.081 121181.5din0.054din0.082 122183din0.055din0.083 123184.5din0.055din0.083 124186din0.056din0.084 125187.5din0.056din0.085 126189din0.056din0.085 127190.5din0.057din0.086 128192din0.057din0.087 129193.5din0.058din0.087 130195din0.058din0.088 131196.5din0.059din0.089 132198din0.059din0.089 133199.5din0.060din0.090 134201din0.060din0.091 135202.5din0.060din0.091 136204din0.061din0.092 137205.5din0.061din0.093 138207din0.062din0.093 139208.5din0.062din0.094 140210din0.063din0.095 141211.5din0.063din0.095 142213din0.064din0.096 143214.5din0.064din0.097 144216din0.064din0.097 145217.5din0.065din0.098 146219din0.065din0.099 147220.5din0.066din0.099 148222din0.066din0.100 149223.5din0.067din0.101 150225din0.067din0.101 151226.5din0.068din0.102 152228din0.068din0.103 153229.5din0.069din0.103 154231din0.069din0.104 155232.5din0.069din0.105 156234din0.070din0.105 157235.5din0.070din0.106 158237din0.071din0.107 159238.5din0.071din0.107 160240din0.072din0.108 161241.5din0.072din0.109 162243din0.073din0.109 163244.5din0.073din0.110 164246din0.073din0.111 165247.5din0.074din0.111 166249din0.074din0.112 167250.5din0.075din0.113 168252din0.075din0.114 169253.5din0.076din0.114 170255din0.076din0.115 171256.5din0.077din0.116 172258din0.077din0.116 173259.5din0.077din0.117 174261din0.078din0.118 175262.5din0.078din0.118 176264din0.079din0.119 177265.5din0.079din0.120 178267din0.080din0.120 179268.5din0.080din0.121 180270din0.081din0.122 181271.5din0.081din0.122 182273din0.081din0.123 183274.5din0.082din0.124 184276din0.082din0.124 185277.5din0.083din0.125 186279din0.083din0.126 187280.5din0.084din0.126 188282din0.084din0.127 189283.5din0.085din0.128 190285din0.085din0.128 191286.5din0.086din0.129 192288din0.086din0.130 193289.5din0.086din0.130 194291din0.087din0.131 195292.5din0.087din0.132 196294din0.088din0.132 197295.5din0.088din0.133 198297din0.089din0.134 199298.5din0.089din0.134 200300din0.090din0.135 201301.5din0.090din0.136 202303din0.090din0.136 203304.5din0.091din0.137 how do i obtain dinar's so i can jump my moros?
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1156	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:36:00 - [177] - Quote Kyt Thrace wrote: I do not claim to be a math expert, but the 50% increase to isotope usage to the 1/3 reduced m3 of isotope, still seems that we are getting screwed & will not be able to carry as much fuel as before. Should it not be 1/2 reduced m3 of isotope to even it out? It should not be.
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 99	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:37:00 - [178] - Quote Someone should convert the RL dollar cost increase of taking a supercap fleet various light years
BadAssMcKill ElitistOps 746	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:37:00 - [179] - Quote Tarsas Phage wrote: I have provided ISK to RL cost in terms of Kuwaiti Dinars below OLD COST ISKNEW COST ISKOLD COST DINARNEW COST DINAR 11.5din0.000din0.001 23din0.001din0.002 34.5din0.001din0.003 46din0.002din0.003 57.5din0.002din0.004 69din0.003din0.005 710.5din0.003din0.005 812din0.004din0.006 913.5din0.004din0.007 1015din0.004din0.007 1116.5din0.005din0.008 1218din0.005din0.009 1319.5din0.006din0.009 1421din0.006din0.010 1522.5din0.007din0.011 1624din0.007din0.011 1725.5din0.008din0.012 1827din0.008din0.013 1928.5din0.009din0.013 2030din0.009din0.014 2131.5din0.009din0.015 2233din0.010din0.015 2334.5din0.010din0.016 2436din0.011din0.017 2537.5din0.011din0.017 2639din0.012din0.018 2740.5din0.012din0.019 2842din0.013din0.019 2943.5din0.013din0.020 3045din0.013din0.021 3146.5din0.014din0.021 3248din0.014din0.022 3349.5din0.015din0.023 3451din0.015din0.024 3552.5din0.016din0.024 3654din0.016din0.025 3755.5din0.017din0.026 3857din0.017din0.026 3958.5din0.017din0.027 4060din0.018din0.028 4161.5din0.018din0.028 4263din0.019din0.029 4364.5din0.019din0.030 4466din0.020din0.030 4567.5din0.020din0.031 4669din0.021din0.032 4770.5din0.021din0.032 4872din0.021din0.033 4973.5din0.022din0.034 5075din0.022din0.034 5176.5din0.023din0.035 5278din0.023din0.036 5379.5din0.024din0.036 5481din0.024din0.037 5582.5din0.025din0.038 5684din0.025din0.038 5785.5din0.026din0.039 5887din0.026din0.040 5988.5din0.026din0.040 6090din0.027din0.041 6191.5din0.027din0.042 6293din0.028din0.042 6394.5din0.028din0.043 6496din0.029din0.044 6597.5din0.029din0.044 6699din0.030din0.045 67100.5din0.030din0.046 68102din0.030din0.046 69103.5din0.031din0.047 70105din0.031din0.048 71106.5din0.032din0.048 72108din0.032din0.049 73109.5din0.033din0.050 74111din0.033din0.050 75112.5din0.034din0.051 76114din0.034din0.052 77115.5din0.034din0.052 78117din0.035din0.053 79118.5din0.035din0.054 80120din0.036din0.054 81121.5din0.036din0.055 82123din0.037din0.056 83124.5din0.037din0.056 84126din0.038din0.057 85127.5din0.038din0.058 86129din0.039din0.058 87130.5din0.039din0.059 88132din0.039din0.060 89133.5din0.040din0.060 90135din0.040din0.061 91136.5din0.041din0.062 92138din0.041din0.062 93139.5din0.042din0.063 94141din0.042din0.064 95142.5din0.043din0.064 96144din0.043din0.065 97145.5din0.043din0.066 98147din0.044din0.066 99148.5din0.044din0.067 100150din0.045din0.068 101151.5din0.045din0.069 102153din0.046din0.069 103154.5din0.046din0.070 104156din0.047din0.071 105157.5din0.047din0.071 106159din0.047din0.072 107160.5din0.048din0.073 108162din0.048din0.073 109163.5din0.049din0.074 110165din0.049din0.075 111166.5din0.050din0.075 112168din0.050din0.076 113169.5din0.051din0.077 114171din0.051din0.077 115172.5din0.051din0.078 116174din0.052din0.079 117175.5din0.052din0.079 118177din0.053din0.080 119178.5din0.053din0.081 120180din0.054din0.081 121181.5din0.054din0.082 122183din0.055din0.083 123184.5din0.055din0.083 124186din0.056din0.084 125187.5din0.056din0.085 126189din0.056din0.085 127190.5din0.057din0.086 128192din0.057din0.087 129193.5din0.058din0.087 130195din0.058din0.088 131196.5din0.059din0.089 132198din0.059din0.089 133199.5din0.060din0.090 134201din0.060din0.091 135202.5din0.060din0.091 136204din0.061din0.092 137205.5din0.061din0.093 138207din0.062din0.093 139208.5din0.062din0.094 140210din0.063din0.095 141211.5din0.063din0.095 142213din0.064din0.096 143214.5din0.064din0.097 144216din0.064din0.097 145217.5din0.065din0.098 146219din0.065din0.099 147220.5din0.066din0.099 148222din0.066din0.100 149223.5din0.067din0.101 150225din0.067din0.101 151226.5din0.068din0.102 152228din0.068din0.103 153229.5din0.069din0.103 154231din0.069din0.104 155232.5din0.069din0.105 156234din0.070din0.105 157235.5din0.070din0.106 158237din0.071din0.107 159238.5din0.071din0.107 160240din0.072din0.108 161241.5din0.072din0.109 162243din0.073din0.109 163244.5din0.073din0.110 164246din0.073din0.111 165247.5din0.074din0.111 166249din0.074din0.112 167250.5din0.075din0.113 168252din0.075din0.114 169253.5din0.076din0.114 170255din0.076din0.115 171256.5din0.077din0.116 172258din0.077din0.116 173259.5din0.077din0.117 174261din0.078din0.118 175262.5din0.078din0.118 176264din0.079din0.119 177265.5din0.079din0.120 178267din0.080din0.120 179268.5din0.080din0.121 180270din0.081din0.122 181271.5din0.081din0.122 182273din0.081din0.123 183274.5din0.082din0.124 184276din0.082din0.124 185277.5din0.083din0.125 186279din0.083din0.126 187280.5din0.084din0.126 188282din0.084din0.127 189283.5din0.085din0.128 190285din0.085din0.128 191286.5din0.086din0.129 192288din0.086din0.130 193289.5din0.086din0.130 194291din0.087din0.131 195292.5din0.087din0.132 196294din0.088din0.132 197295.5din0.088din0.133 198297din0.089din0.134 199298.5din0.089din0.134 200300din0.090din0.135 201301.5din0.090din0.136 202303din0.090din0.136 203304.5din0.091din0.137 What about Emirati dirhams .
Apollo Purvon School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:37:00 - [180] - Quote You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem.
Ammzi Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 1737	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:39:00 - [181] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Welp. CCP just got out-smarted.
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 218	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:40:00 - [182] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Please don't burst Fozzie's delusion-bubble by pointing out the contradictory changes being made.
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 84	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:41:00 - [183] - Quote ovenproofjet wrote: It would seem I have to go to Reddit now to get a reasonable discussion of new changes these days without some making a joke of the thread. Implying this entire thing isn't a joke.
Calorn Marthor Standard Fuel Company 25	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:42:00 - [184] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Are you aware that this is very close to making fuel blocks questionable? Currently it takes 217.6m-¦ of materials to make 40 fuel blocks which have a total volume of 200m-¦. 60m-¦ thereof are isotopes which means you are here cutting the bill of materials by 20m-¦. Instead of compressing the stuff, you are now inflating it a tiny bit (197.6m-¦->200m-¦). Especially when Jump Freighter transports get more expensive, fuel blocks should be SMALLER than their components - otherwise people would just transport the materials and then assemble the fuel blocks at the destination (which would pretty much defeat any argument why fuel blocks were invented in the first place). While I think this proposed change will not outweigh the convenience factor yet, it will definitely incentivize local PI and fuel block production (especially in combination with the announced 5% material bonus in starbases). Still people's own decision, but players who want to play "optimal" may feel the need to return to the messy pre-fuel-block-situation in terms of handling stuff PLUS the extra step of fuel block creation.
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 42	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:42:00 - [185] - Quote Ammzi wrote: Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Welp. CCP just got out-smarted.
Dimitri Forgroth Dark Destiny Inc. 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:43:00 - [186] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Basically this. This is an easy to make change in the future if ice prices do start to drop from fewer POSes being run, but postcognition is significantly more reliable than precognition.
Current Habit The Scope Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:43:00 - [187] - Quote Ammzi wrote: Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Welp. CCP just got out-smarted. again
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 305	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:44:00 - [188] - Quote If we believe that the consumption amount influences usage frequence, wouldn't it make more sense to decrease the amount so that more capitals jump more often? More capitals jumping around means more get caught. A docked capital never gets blown up.
Aareya Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 17	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:44:00 - [189] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. It is often a dream of high sec corporations to place a POS in high sec. The standings requirements restrict these many new high sec corporations from doing so. The summer expansion will remove this obstacle allowing every new high sec corporation to erect their own high sec POS. What happens if the influx of new POS towers offsets or exceeds the expected reduction in size of high sec POS towers? With an increased demand of isotopes (driven by an increase demand of fuel blocks), wouldn't this change further impact the isotope market?
Marketing Chairman Stalin Space Marketing Department GoonSwarm 42	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:45:00 - [190] - Quote L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S
Needmore Longcat Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 85	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:47:00 - [191] - Quote Oh. One other thing, that I find absolutely astonishing. You changed your mind literally 10 minutes into the thread, which raises a very important question: Actually how much prior thought and planning has gone into this?
El Space Mariachi Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 70	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:48:00 - [192] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S L A S A R B O N G H I T S same .
MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 101	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:49:00 - [193] - Quote Ok, Fozzinator... I declare a truce. And I think it's time to be quasi-constructive to you. You have a great history of making thoughtful and impactful game decisions (tech nerf, pirate ships etc etc). One of your forte's has always been the combination of your extensive game knowledge with your ability to see the big picture and the long term impacts of any proposed changes. You have also, historically, done a great job at explaining your thought process in the dev blogs of any of these changes. Today's announcement just feels a little more whimsical than we've grown to expect from you. Instead of "I am changing X because of Y," you've given us "well, how about this?" I'm sure there are a lot of reasons behind your proposal that I (and the other 99% of the posters here) don't understand/haven't thought of... but just from my chair, it seems like you haven't either. And I only say that because you typically have laid a much stronger groundwork than you did here (as evidenced by the fact that you implemented a suggested change within the first 30 minutes of the thread being up). Not that the timing of Resgo's suggestion negates its validity, but I would contend that if you're taking the first suggestions that come in, you may not have thought it out very thoroughly. Or, maybe you have a good idea of where you want to go, and you're a step ahead and using the community to help vet your idea... in which case, that's an impressive meta game.
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 79	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:50:00 - [194] - Quote Needmore Longcat wrote: Oh. One other thing, that I find absolutely astonishing. You changed your mind literally 10 minutes into the thread, which raises a very important question: Actually how much prior thought and planning has gone into this? I can imagine Fozzie and Rise eating together today and Rise laughing evily "You don't dare to post about..." Thats they only way I can imagine this. Because two seconds of thoughts discard this as a good idea.
Cpt Ghost Sea Hamster Legionnaires The Unthinkables 19	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:51:00 - [195] - Quote Didn't read a single argument in this thread explaining why doing JF runs should be more expensive.. Can someone enlighten me please, cause so far I just think it's ****. In my eyes it looks like CCP continues to suck all the joy out of this game.
Lady Isabell S.A.S Pandemic Legion 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:51:00 - [196] - Quote Needmore Longcat wrote: Oh. One other thing, that I find absolutely astonishing. You changed your mind literally 10 minutes into the thread, which raises a very important question: Actually how much prior thought and planning has gone into this? I'm sure they are wonder what this "thought and planning" you speak of is so here is what Wikipedia has to say about it: Planning (also called forethought) is the process of thinking about and organizing the activities required to achieve a desired goal. Planning involves the creation and maintenance of a plan. As such, planning is a fundamental property of intelligent behavior. This thought process is essential to the creation and refinement of a plan, or integration of it with other plans; that is, it combines forecasting of developments with the preparation of scenarios of how to react to them. An important, albeit often ignored aspect of planning, is the relationship it holds with forecasting. Forecasting can be described as predicting what the future will look like, whereas planning predicts what the future should look like.[1] The counterpart to planning is spontaneous order.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 13	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:53:00 - [197] - Quote For all of you crowing that this will have any effect whatsoever on force projection, you're just wrong. Cost isn't an issue. Not for the groups you are worried about showing up on your doorstep with capitals. But it is a nice subsidy to the corn growers in the midwest, I mean, AFK ice bots in Empire. Perhaps they should have seen what the effects actually become on isotope use related to starbases before creating this new social welfare program.
Zeus Maximo Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 602	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:53:00 - [198] - Quote I think Fozzie's board room meetings to discuss changes consists of him sitting in front of a mirror. This one change just nerfed all of the bonus's you gave null sec industry. jack1974 > can still call me zeus :) if you want Danalee > Jack is more humble :)
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore 650	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:53:00 - [199] - Quote So jumps/portals will require 50% more fuel, but bays will hold 3x more. 1.5/3 = .5. ***** about to get expensive, yo. But less refueling required. Buy isotopes. GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥ -Grath Telkin, 2014.
Calorn Marthor Standard Fuel Company 26	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:53:00 - [200] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. Hehe. Pretty much to the point. I am making serious preparations for a demand spike in POS parts. Everyone and his mom will instantly want to drop a POS somewhere when this hits TQ. In addition, Ytterbium tells us that POSes use 5% less materials on all manufacturing jobs. The question ofc is: what happens in the long run? After the initial rush, how many POSes will be operated? If manufacturing in a POS becomes mandatory to be competitive due to the material bonus, you will see a much larger number of smaller POSes. You should rather get that "multiple lab/assembly benefit question" right then you would not need to worry about people downgrading POSes...
Berluth Luthian Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 187	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:54:00 - [201] - Quote What if fuel cost was a little more logarithmically tied to distance jumped? Boost all jump ranges by 10-25% Reduce jump fuel volume by 50-75% Scale jump fuel cost by balancing efficiency of distance so that... Jumping about 25% of current ranges is actually about 10% cheaper than now. Jumping about 50% of current range is about 10% more expensive than now. Jumping 100% of current range is 100% more expensive than now. Jumping 125% of current range is 250% more expensive than now. The trade-off would be shorter cyno chains for maximum fuel efficiency or longer jumps for max speed and security?
Boogalo Space Exploitation Inc Get Off My Lawn 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:57:00 - [202] - Quote ovenproofjet wrote: It would seem I have to go to Reddit now to get a reasonable discussion of new changes these days without some making a joke of the thread. This thread is still more readable than reddit.
Meandering Milieu House Aratus Fatal Ascension 44	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:57:00 - [203] - Quote Posting in a stealth "nerf power projection" thread. Power projection and hull tanking, Fozzie is on a roll and I like it.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 3003	Posted - 2014.04.29 14:58:00 - [204] - Quote Locked for a quick cleaning. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department

MissBolyai Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 103	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:26:00 - [205] - Quote Thanks for clearing those scrub posts... Now fozzie can focus on my post :)
Shonion FREE GATES Nulli Secunda 49	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:27:00 - [206] - Quote 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. Wouldn't be better to wait till one change takes effect then change another thing. I simply not beleive that this change will effect isotope usage that much, because ppl will put up other towers in high sec, maybe not for runing research or manufacturing jobs, but for run compression modules for their miners. Even that, the demand of isotopes already pushed the prices up, because that well planned. This going to skyrocket it. CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. After CCP nerfed ice mining at all with limits (witch not definetly bad), then you expect with the summer changes to force ppl to build up industry and market in 0.0 you instantly hit it with heavily increasing the transporting costs. You should know that 0.0 regions don't have everything in local to run any decent manufacturing, build T2 or just live there, you have to import several materials for example 3 of 4 isotopes usually. Regions has limited resources, some kind of moons are not exist in several regions. CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. Its just simply makes the newbros life harder, market more expensive and industry less profitable in 0.0. CCP Fozzie wrote: The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. If its about nerfing force projections, then some other ideas would be much better then this. Simply reduce jump ranges or give a cooldown to jump drives, but this is only impact prices and eve slowly forced to a hyperinflation when lot of ppl just get off and go play something else. Changing shipbalance can make a few bad nights for some ppl, but changing the economy to wrong way, can collapse the game. Actually agree with MissBolyai, at this point i have no idea what is the motivation of this announcement. But we will have shiny skins, yaaay... -.-
Zomgnomnom Royal Black Watch Highlanders Mordus Angels 29	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:28:00 - [207] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. THIS.
David Magnus 296	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:28:00 - [208] - Quote Wow, where did all that useful data go? I wasn't done copying it into Excel :( http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/fight-us-maybe http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/winterupdate http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/supercaps http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/pandemiclegion
Lyn Fel Black Frog Logistics Red-Frog 2	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:30:00 - [209] - Quote This is unfortunate news and we will likely see an increase in Black Frog pricing this summer as a result to compensate.
TheMercenaryKing StarFleet Enterprises StarFleet. 171	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:31:00 - [210] - Quote Stimulating Iso and Competitiveness: Reduce the Heavy water output of the 3 non isotope ice blocks, specifically nerf Dark Glitter (more profitable than Ore). No one mines the Isotope ore in null BECAUSE IT IS CHEAP. "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." No, it wont. Not at all. It will hurt smaller groups but larger ones wont give a ****. If they are moving capitals then they should expect to lose one or two. that is EVERYTHING compared to the cost of moving them.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1157	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:32:00 - [211] - Quote Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter. Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates. If the cost per ship were locked at what it costs to move a bs (or more like 3-4x that), the costs would be much more reasonable.
James Messina Section 8. Fatal Ascension 2	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:32:00 - [212] - Quote Literally stop nerfing every nice thing in the game. making it harder for players to make isk, while trying to drive up the cost of fuel. Instead of nerfing existing mechanics, why not just add new content? We are getting tired of the good things in this game being taken away one patch at a time.
Powers Sa 1064	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:33:00 - [213] - Quote Capqu wrote: i wish you'd stop trying to apply band-aid fixes to power projection and address the actual issues tho What issues? lol
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 784	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:33:00 - [214] - Quote so this change is geared toward making Jump freighters more expensive too use? will this small price change stop them coming too jita? is this also a slight cost nerf to Black ops? and do you have any plans on actually dealing with power projection on an actual large scale? Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 455	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:33:00 - [215] - Quote I guess now is a good time to restate my concern without it being buried in a veritable font of autism. The current proposed changes suggest that a fuel consumption increase is coming to Jump Bridges. Jump bridges use Liquid Ozone (LO3) as fuel. Similar changes to uses of isotopes are being mollified by a decrease in their volume. Due to LO3's additional uses, modifying its volume is not advisable. Can the Jump Bridge pos module have its volume increased to compensate for the increased LO3 usage? This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Varg Altol Kill-Switch Engage 10	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:34:00 - [216] - Quote Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. Perfect. Give this man a job
ElectronHerd Askulf Reasonable People Of Sound Mind 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:34:00 - [217] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. The problem here is that not everything necessary to production can be gathered in any given locale - there are always moongoos that must be imported. Also, because it's trivial to outproduce a local null market (even the more robust markets), product must be exported. This combination already disincents null industry. Higher jump freight costs hurt, they don't help
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1157	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:35:00 - [218] - Quote Powers Sa wrote: Capqu wrote: i wish you'd stop trying to apply band-aid fixes to power projection and address the actual issues tho What issues? That the biggest ships in the game are also the fastest, and that moving around large fleets without taking the time or effort to use gates is basically free. There are many corps that use bridging as a replacement for roaming. You just autopilot your bait around, and when you hear shield alarm you have everyone tab back to eve, and light the cyno. Its promoting mostly afk gameplay, and reduces the risk with moving fleets dramatically.
Powers Sa 1064	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:36:00 - [219] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter. Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates. Get all the way out. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. lol
TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 633	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:36:00 - [220] - Quote Damn you must really really REALLY want null-sec to keep their industry local huh? My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 7143	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:39:00 - [221] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter. Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates. If the cost per ship were locked at what it costs to move a bs (or more like 3-4x that), the costs would be much more reasonable. what kind of idiot bridges a jump freighter, if you're bridging you bridge a REGULAR freighter Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Jaari Val'Dara Wormbro Ocularis Inferno 81	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:40:00 - [222] - Quote Well that screws over the black ops, it's difficult to bridge ships with it as it is, but now with increase in fuel need it will be even more insane.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1158	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:43:00 - [223] - Quote Weaselior wrote: Michael Harari wrote: Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter. Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates. If the cost per ship were locked at what it costs to move a bs (or more like 3-4x that), the costs would be much more reasonable. what kind of idiot bridges a jump freighter, if you're bridging you bridge a REGULAR freighter People do, if you have only 1 titan and have to make 2 jumps, and dont want to move the titan. Bridging a regular freighter is cheaper than jumping a jump freighter as well.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 383	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:43:00 - [224] - Quote Good direction, but bad idea. This will hit small players, especially using JF. Better way - increase fuel usage : - carriers 50% , increase fuel bay by 50% - supercarriers 100%, increase fuel bay 50% ( yes 50%) - Titans 150% , increase fuel bay by 100% Dreads without change ( this ship class don't need nerf , as it is best balanced in the whole combat capital ship class) Jump freighters/ Ronquals - they also should not be nerfed if current CCP goal is to boost nullsec industry - as biggest part of the profit will be burned out in fuel. Black Ops - well , hard to say. Isthar Changes LVL 5 Missions in Nullspace
Nicole Hastings Caldari Research Corporation 12	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:45:00 - [225] - Quote Change an entire market based on pure speculation while screwing over the people that this expansion is marketed towards. ... Caldari Research Corp: Blueprint Research and Copying on Request!
brownAir Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:46:00 - [226] - Quote Please, lets just wait and see what happens after all the industry dust settles and then make adjustments.
Powers Sa 1065	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:47:00 - [227] - Quote TigerXtrm wrote: Damn you must really really REALLY want null-sec to keep their industry local huh? Its ok, you guys can still build everything for syndicate and jump it over with 0 mids. lol
chris elliot Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel 342	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:47:00 - [228] - Quote This is such a bad change I don't even know where to begin.
Techno36 Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:48:00 - [229] - Quote Does this effect covert jump portals? If it does perhaps give blops a bonus on fuel consumption? Seems like an unneeded nerf to black ops stuff.
Macomb Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance 6	Posted - 2014.04.29 15:55:00 - [230] - Quote how about you actually fix something for a change and dont mess with very few things i still like in the game...
Tam Althor lll tempered sea bass Brothers of Tangra 19	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:00:00 - [231] - Quote How does anyone at CCP think that the usage of ISO's is going to drop with the summer expansion? With the elemination of standings needs to put up a pos, and with the compression pos structures you are going to see lots more pos's being put up in high sec. This is going to drive the ice product market up on it's own. ISO's usage bump for fuel is just going to drive the price of fuel blocks even higher. You really should hold off on this change until a point release to see how the markets are reacting to more pos's being up and running.
Sperg Eagle Zigglesworth Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:00:00 - [232] - Quote CCP Fozzie, the biggest idiot in EVE Online, and that's pretty hard to do. Thanks for ruining small alliance logistics.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 457	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:01:00 - [233] - Quote Tam Althor wrote: How does anyone at CCP think that the usage of ISO's is going to drop with the summer expansion? With the elemination of standings needs to put up a pos, and with the compression pos structures you are going to see lots more pos's being put up in high sec. This is going to drive the ice product market up on it's own. ISO's usage bump for fuel is just going to drive the price of fuel blocks even higher. You really should hold off on this change until a point release to see how the markets are reacting to more pos's being up and running. It took me a moment to realize that "ISO's" meant isotopes. They're called "topes." This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Jack Kennedy Dambusters 617 Sq Northern Associates. 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:01:00 - [234] - Quote I do not see this as being a needed step in the right direction, it could alienate more players and isn't required. If its intended to effect the larger fleet jumps fuel for fights then you need to tackle the Jump Bridging fuel requirements. Or have some fleet jump fuel dynamic if doing in large numbers. This will hurt small and big alike the cost of fuel is already doubled in recent weeks. So for example a JF fuel requirement depending on skills and ship type to further reaches of null from Jita is approximately in the range of 60-80k isotopes each way. It cannot really be good to change this to 90/120k Iso's each way if prices stay the same or go up, that's at least 180m/240m round trip. Or any equivalent smaller jumps for the same. Carriers are less fuel costs than JF but then a 50% increase just for cargo of 10k m3 and 2 BS in ship maintenance array seems fubar, your not adjusting cargo sizes so why the fuel stick? Surely additional fuel cost will simple be levied onwards to others fees, charges and contract costs and passed on to consumers. Yes it will drive up desires to source cheaper Iso via icebelts but as others state these are not big enough for large fleet mining ops. It may hurt the smaller guys in increasing their costs. To apply this across the board to all jump drives and a 50% increase in one go seems harsh. Personally i just haven't seen a clammer from large or small players groups saying boy i wish the fuel needed was 50% higher that make the game s Some changes announced are interesting and the verdict is out, i will watch to see the verdicts of others at Fanfest round tables to see.
Shonion FREE GATES Nulli Secunda 49	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:04:00 - [235] - Quote Doesn't Riot Games looking for another well trained tallents? I have an suggestion...
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5047	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:10:00 - [236] - Quote I have an idea... .
Proeliator Yeva DNS Requiem Brothers of Tangra 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:10:00 - [237] - Quote Good way to kill the small corps. High five CCP!
MagnusBraxx Algorab Technology Brothers of Tangra 6	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:11:00 - [238] - Quote Dear ccp fozzie...I don't like you. you are a ***!
Rayana Darine Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:14:00 - [239] - Quote Why are you ruining the game for everyone? Isn't enough that topes prices have doubled in past year? it starts more and more looking like an ill run Government that can only think of hiking taxes as means to get richer. This sounds like Obamacare already.
Shonion FREE GATES Nulli Secunda 49	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:14:00 - [240] - Quote Its one thing that its increase the cost of force projection, moving caps, logistic. Its won't hurt bigger alliances. The more important thing is, that this whole change this, and removing standing requirement to put up a tower in high sec will impact on topes prices. Simply its highly increase the demand for topes. If topes prices increasing thats increase the whole T2 prices. Changing one little number can impact on the whole eve economy.
DGDragon Rotten Kimchi Squadron Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:15:00 - [241] - Quote It seems to killing Outer Indurstry is CCP's final goal...
Hopelesshobo Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade 207	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:15:00 - [242] - Quote Marketing Chairman Stalin wrote: penifSMASH wrote: Can you double the base amount of liquid ozone consumption for lighting a cyno reduce all frigate cargoholds by 200% to compensate You want frigates to have a negative cargohold?!?! Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
13 nonames Jumpbridg 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:16:00 - [243] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Open season for devs?
Gabriel Z Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 25	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:19:00 - [244] - Quote If the ISK faucets don't produce more ISK (and I don't think they ever will), the constantly rising prices of everything puts casual players at an extreme disadvantage. I simply don't have the time to grind out the ISK necessary to buy all the fits for all of the doctrines my alliance uses, plus the replacement ships, ammo, and transport costs for moving that stuff around. We don't even have large scale T2 or T3 doctrine fleets either, which I imagine costs significantly more. I barely have time to participate in the actual fleet action this game is supposed to be all about (the time eaten up by all the nonsense that goes with fleets is unbelievable and a direct result of poor ingame tool design). I pay cash for my subscription. I'm not buying PLEX on top of that to keep myself supplied. You guys are backdooring the cash shop model and you're hoping no one will notice.
13 nonames Jumpbridg 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:20:00 - [245] - Quote Swiftstrike1 wrote: Here's a crazy thought... Remove all the jump fuel from Hisec. If all the jump fuel had to be sourced from 0.0 and lowsec, and the different racial variants were only found in specific regions... the space you control would directly determine which racial jump drives you could fuel and therefore what capital ships you could field. That would undoubtedly cause utter chaos and a massive uproar so you might have to introduce some sort of "generic" jump fuel that can be found everywhere, but has a lower efficiency e.g. you need more of it to make the same jump. well you might want to think about what you said since each region holds its own type of ice.....
13 nonames Jumpbridg 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:21:00 - [246] - Quote Sperg Eagle Zigglesworth wrote: CCP Fozzie, the biggest idiot in EVE Online, and that's pretty hard to do. Thanks for ruining small alliance logistics. i feel for you ccp has made nothing but **** changes this upcoming summer xpack
StinGer ShoGuN Pragmatic Kernel Rat Pack Renegades 9	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:23:00 - [247] - Quote Seriously, are you trying to kill all small/mid size corps/alliances living in low sec and not involved in FW or what ??!! If you're going on a scheme HS <-> carebearism, LS <-> FW and null <-> PvP (well, if sov warfare is PvP), say it already so that I can stop my subscriptions. With the blogs regarding industry, it seems you are already nerfing POS in LS for those using them for doing... INDUSTRY !! Ho YEAH FOR REAL !! Now, you want to increase the fuel consumption, which will increase the fuel cost so POS are gonna be more expensive. And I'll tell you something you may have forgotten: THERE IS NO FUEL CONSUMPTION REDUCTION IN LOW BECAUSE THERE IS NO SOV !! HELLOOO !!! So now, basically, it will cost me more to move material to low to manufacture stuff and it will cost me more to maintain POS while I won't earn more on the other hand. Tell me how as a small entity I can build up with you new system ? You literally killing all income possibilities. CCP stop it already, think about not FW low sec players. You're seriously killing us.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 659	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 - [248] - Quote I thought you were seriously going to man up and do some kind of capital nerf. disappointed.
BigSako Aliastra Gallente Federation 100	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 - [249] - Quote Again, CCP is nerfing PLAYERS instead of alliances. Quote: 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. Please, show me a single graph that will point out how much RESEARCH POSES IN HIGHSEC consume vs. how much Capital Fleets in this game consume in isotopes. Quote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. CCP failed at that for the past 4 years since I played EvE. This won't change anything, and I havent seen any changes so far made to ice belts. Quote: 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. This does not matter for large alliances/coalitions. They will just charge their renters more money. It impacts small corps and solo players the most. Long story short, all arguments provided are invalid in my opinion. Counter Example: Let's increase the cost of water, because people are going to be drinking less water next month. That's not how economy works.
Chic Botany Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 78	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:27:00 - [250] - Quote So first you nerf the infinite ice which I can understand, it was pretty silly when you think about it. Now you create extra demand from people who run cap ships? Seriously, can you give me the email address of your dealer, I could do with some of the stuff you're smoking. You want people to go to nullsec but now make it more expensive to live there due to higher transport costs. You want industry in nullsec but who's gonna lodge expensive BPO's in a pos that anybody can take down without wardecs You want simpler industry with the new dumbing down research idea, but dissuade nullsec industry with more expensive transport if you live a long way from empire. Ah I see where you're going, you're listening too much to the "Wah the old players have got it so much better than I have" newbies.
Hopelesshobo Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade 207	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:29:00 - [251] - Quote Rather then have a linear jump fuel cost as we have now, why not introduce an exponential fuel cost. This would help nerf power projection by making alliances think twice about jumping at their max range to get places quickly, however it would have a smaller impact on industry because they could make double the amount of jumps they are currently to reduce their travel costs. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 305	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:32:00 - [252] - Quote Gabriel Z wrote: I pay cash for my subscription. I'm not buying PLEX on top of that to keep myself supplied. You guys are backdooring the cash shop model and you're hoping no one will notice. Making you buy PLEX is kind of convoluted when they could just use the NeX. "This summer; super-isotopes are coming to an AUR shop near you. 10% increase in jump distance and half the consumption. Put some oomph in your jumps!"
SuPPrisE Ambraelle House Aratus Fatal Ascension 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:32:00 - [253] - Quote SOOOOOOOOO lets make ice rare and in high demand ... that way we can reduce the scale of fights in eve, reduce the server loads, and drop costs, WINNER. how about you stop being so cheap. buy new servers. stop trying to brake everything and make the game more enjoyable rather then a grind for everything. it will cost to undock soon. leave it as it is. make ice belts in 0.0 perma again. introduce a system for afkers to be booted from servers if found to be in space but inactive. reduce cloaky campers / increase null sec ice mining . done . and increase rat size to make it not possible to go afk for the chance of being ruined by the rats. or how about making the pos mods too cpu / power grid heavy for small poses ect and that way you wont get down scaling for posses. with the price of plex being stupidly expensive its going to push more people out of the game. or is that what ccp wants ?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 659	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:32:00 - [254] - Quote Hopelesshobo wrote: Rather then have a linear jump fuel cost as we have now, why not introduce an exponential fuel cost. This would help nerf power projection by making alliances think twice about jumping at their max range to get places quickly, however it would have a smaller impact on industry because they could make double the amount of jumps they are currently to reduce their travel costs. they also could just reduce jump range by 50%
5n4keyes Sacred Templars Fatal Ascension 93	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:33:00 - [255] - Quote Fantastic change! support 110%
Shnougle Elguonhs Dead's Prostitutes Li3 Federation 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:34:00 - [256] - Quote This is ridiculous. These changes will only cause issues for small null-sec and low-sec corps. Not looking forward to this at all.
gascanu Bearing Srl. 103	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:35:00 - [257] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! 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. [/list] [b]The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. . i'm sorry, but all i can say is WTF??? In which way will this fuell expense increase affect an alliance with an several hundred billions month income??? really? that's all you can came up with? "hey guys, moving a capital fleet will now cost us extra 300 mil out of our 300 billion income/month... really..." How can't a dev understand that this will hurt the small corps/ more that big coalitions, and it's the smallest thing that can have an impact on "power projection" Really Fozzie, i'm out of words....
Shonion FREE GATES Nulli Secunda 50	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:35:00 - [258] - Quote 5n4keyes wrote: Fantastic change! support 110% i want from that weed Fozzie shared with you too.
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:39:00 - [259] - Quote Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt."
viper78 Anthar Stealth Tactics and Reconnaissance Service Rebel Alliance of New Eden 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:41:00 - [260] - Quote By reducing the volume of isotopes you will make isotope ice compression less useful as well. I don't think all the math has been done for a change like this. Are you going to reduce the volume of compressed isotope ice as well?
Tam Althor lll tempered sea bass Brothers of Tangra 20	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:45:00 - [261] - Quote Paul Tsukaya wrote: Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt." It's going to hurt the smaller groups more because they rely on a very small number of members to move things from 0.0 to highsec and back. They don't have a warchest of isotopes stored for use and the isk to refill the warchest whenever needed.
Pah Cova Made in Portugal S.A. 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:45:00 - [262] - Quote Have you CCP guys going nuts? Did you recently came to Portugal get any kind of graduation like our politics? Are you tell small corps to go away play another game? 50% ? And what are we get in exchange to compensate that 50% extra cost? From 3 years ago until now, CCP are making everything to take money out our pocket in every expansion you release, and still on going to take more. What are we get in exchange to compensate that? Reducing the ice weight does not compensate our wallets, can you think in something better? What about increase the anomalies number and the bounty-¦s in 50%? What about ice anomalies for every system in null sec? For me this particular decision worth a red card, just because it will affect in much, as allways smaller corps.
Larodil Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:48:00 - [263] - Quote So let's get a discussion from CCP on why they feel this is a necessary change. What possible benefit does a Nulsec corp/alliance get with this change? What possible benefit does a Highsec corp/alliance get with this change? This is either a change that has been very much not thought out in advance, or one that is targeted at a specific group of people to make things more difficult for them. Changes to the game should (in theory) have some benefit other than just "lets press this button that sucks the air out of the tank and see what it does to the mice inside." I'd like to see what in the world the "benefit" is to the players that are actually paying CCP for this game.
Crashtec Unforeseen Consequences. The Unthinkables 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:49:00 - [264] - Quote Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. this is stupid... since only 1 type of isotope in 0.0 is availaible this change is going to **** everyone ...
Dave Stark 5192	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:51:00 - [265] - Quote i don't know if any one has stated the obvious but i'm going to state it; how does this not massively arse **** the "little guy"? big entities benefit from being able to throw cash around and not bat an eyelid, the little guy doesn't.
Tam Althor lll tempered sea bass Brothers of Tangra 20	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:51:00 - [266] - Quote Pah Cova wrote: Have you CCP guys going nuts? What are we get in exchange to compensate that? Reducing the ice weight does not compensate our wallets, can you think in something better? What about increase the anomalies number and the bounty-¦s in 50%? What about ice anomalies for every system in null sec? For me this particular decision worth a red card, just because it will affect in much, as allways smaller corps. Hell, it would help to cut the ice respawn timer by 50% to 2 hours or even better to 1 hour
JEFFRAIDER Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 300	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:54:00 - [267] - Quote Honest question, how long have you been thinking of this before posting this devblog? I'm guessing it's a "this week" thing, right?
Jack Kennedy Dambusters 617 Sq Northern Associates. 2	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:54:00 - [268] - Quote Paul Tsukaya wrote: Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt." you clearly have no idea what your talking about, enough said on that one.
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:57:00 - [269] - Quote Tam Althor wrote: Paul Tsukaya wrote: Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt." It's going to hurt the smaller groups more because they rely on a very small number of members to move things from 0.0 to highsec and back. They don't have a warchest of isotopes stored for use and the isk to refill the warchest whenever needed. Are you honestly suggesting that this will paralyze small alliance jf services? That's baloney. All they will have to do is raise their prices to compensate, the same as large alliance jf services.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 457	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:57:00 - [270] - Quote The primary point of this change isn't to nerf power projection; it's to increase usage of topes following a massive draw down of POS in highsec. The costs just aren't enough to really care much about; I'm not sure why you're all complaining. This is coming from an individual who refuses to allow his alliance to pay for his topes, too -- it's just not enough money to be worth the roles hassle. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:58:00 - [271] - Quote Jack Kennedy wrote: Paul Tsukaya wrote: Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt." you clearly have no idea what your talking about, enough said on that one. This change hurts those who use capitals more, more than those who use capitals less. I may not be super 1337 like you, but I can at least put 2 and 2 together.
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 84	Posted - 2014.04.29 16:59:00 - [272] - Quote Paul Tsukaya wrote: Why are people claiming this will hurt small alliances the most, when small alliances use capitals sparingly while large alliances hot drop everything in sight? I swear every single possible capital nerf that CCP could propose will get knocked for hurting "the little guy with his carrier alt." If you own capitals and/or supercapitals, the fuel should not be an issue for you. But if you are in scrub-tier income or you are new to the game, you rely on others for your logistics and shipments, in 0.0 specially. This nerf means that JF owners will charge more, therefore market gets more expensive because of shipping costs, and hurting the poor guy. If you have a shitload of capitals you don't care a lot if you have to pay X or 2X.
Winifred Running Goat 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:00:00 - [273] - Quote eve is hard, adapt or die -áno, i don't want more server load. WARNING: If you donGÇÖt post alot you will become GÇ£Inactive fa**otGÇ¥ instead of GÇ£Bitter vetGÇ¥
Amarrain miner DeepSpace Manufacturers Brothers of Tangra 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:02:00 - [274] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. CCP, you just got swerved.
JEFFRAIDER Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 301	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:05:00 - [275] - Quote So we can fit 3x as many isotopes in a single JF load now u say?
Jamir Von Lietuva The Exit Plan Test Alliance Please Ignore 23	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:06:00 - [276] - Quote wow CCP yet another nerf to pirat with nerf on AFK camp cloak cyno hotdrop
Rittel Band of Valence 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:10:00 - [277] - Quote OK I sorta see the idea for nerfing capitals moving around from one end of the cluster to the other but I'd be this is going to be a massive whack on logistics. I live out in the back end of no where and I have to do 4 JF jumps to get from low sec to my 0.0 home. I accept its part of the price of where I choose to live. This will add around about 20,000 isotopes to a single direction trip in a JF (with max skills). Given that a JF can hold about 2.5 Large towers worth of POS Fuel even running a 3 or 4 towers becomes an issue not to mention that almost everything we need has to be shipped up from empire. So this patch is going to nerf mineral compression meaning we need to make more trips to move minerals up to 0.0 and now you are going to make jumping things up even more expensive? I've been playing 8 years now and have been a POS director for pretty much all of that time (god help me) but for the love of a things holy will you stop making the most boring parts of the game longer, more tedious and harder to do. Can you at least look at LOWERING the fuel cost for JFs (or keep them as is), the compression nerf has dealt with the super cap issue.
Master Sergeant MacRobert Space-Brewery-Association 24eme Legion Etrangere 46	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:10:00 - [278] - Quote I hope this is just the beginning of the power projection nerf. Look at all the "Blue Donut" members whining already.
Danilaw Origin. Black Legion. 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:10:00 - [279] - Quote This change is making it increasingly hard to live normadic as a small entity. That and the super carrier changes kills the last standing solo hot-droppers. Thanks frozzi.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1159	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:11:00 - [280] - Quote JEFFRAIDER wrote: So we can fit 3x as many isotopes in a single JF load now u say? Volume is reduced by 1/3, not to 1/3
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1149	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:12:00 - [281] - Quote If they wanted to nerf power projection they didn't have to include JFs. And even Black Ops... Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 659	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:12:00 - [282] - Quote I look forward to the excuses nullsec comes up with when there's an actual real nerf
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:14:00 - [283] - Quote I bet if I went back, I could find a thread where people that nerfing tech would completely ruin the little guy
JEFFRAIDER Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 301	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:16:00 - [284] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: JEFFRAIDER wrote: So we can fit 3x as many isotopes in a single JF load now u say? Volume is reduced by 1/3, not to 1/3
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1159	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:17:00 - [285] - Quote [quote=Danilaw] A small Black Ops roaming gang will have a much harder time/quote] Black ops dont roam
Gabriel Z Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 26	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:18:00 - [286] - Quote Ravcharas wrote: Gabriel Z wrote: I pay cash for my subscription. I'm not buying PLEX on top of that to keep myself supplied. You guys are backdooring the cash shop model and you're hoping no one will notice. Making you buy PLEX is kind of convoluted when they could just use the NeX. "This summer; super-isotopes are coming to an AUR shop near you. 10% increase in jump distance and half the consumption. Put some oomph in your jumps!" I'm not suggesting buying stuff in that way. What I'm getting at is that there is a steady rise in prices, which means either I grind more or buy less. PLEX is the first pain point. Once you can't grind your PLEXes, you either pay for your sub or drop accounts. As you drop accounts, you lose your ability to engage in things that are alt intensive. As you lose that ability, you lose more income. Even if you choose to pay cash for one account, the constantly rising prices mean you still have to grind more and more to pay for your combat supplies. At some point, I simply won't be able to grind what I need to pariticpate in higher "level" fleets (e.g. T3 fleets). My only remaining option would be to buy PLEX for cash to sell for ISK. I think this is the real goal. Increase profits from the casual player base who will feed the PLEX market for the lifers. This was the brainstorm that the cash shop experts they hired brought to the table.
xXFreshnessXx Origin. Black Legion. 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:18:00 - [287] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Along with the topes volume reduction I've came up with some things to add below as I feel an initial 50% increase + mass multiplier in kind of staggering. Blops Blops - no static cost increase, increase fuel bay to 2400m3 from 1250 and increase jump range to 4.25ly from 3.5. Covert Jump Portal Generator I - increase fuel cost 5% when used. No Changes Dreads - no cost increase as they have more mass and less jump range than carriers, not too mention no drone bays or utility slots. Jump Freighters - leave alone Rorquals - leave alone Nerfs Carriers - increase cost 25% Supers - increase cost 30% Titans - increase cost 25% Jump Portal Generator I - increase fuel cost 10%(making it 35% total) when used. Follow me on Twitter @FR3SH0PShttps://twitter.com/FR3SH0PS
Genicall Royal Assassins 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:19:00 - [288] - Quote Looks like CCP is behind the Global Economy Crisis and they are trying hard to implement it in EVE as well ;O
Emmy Mnemonic Svea Rike Fatal Ascension 14	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:21:00 - [289] - Quote The higher costs will impact smaller alliances/corps, making them use caps/supers even less than today. Small-gang BLOPS-drops will be more expensive, but given the expensive super-pimped targets I doubt the cost will affect these fleets much, the change in fuel-consumption WILL change it though - less capability to bridge fleets combined with harder logistics to get your BOBs back after a drop etc. So BLOP-activity will not decrease, but the fleets will require more pilots, both BOB-pilots and BR-pilots. Only the well-organized gangs with enough numbers of skilled pilots will do this. Prices for the ordinary space-grunt in nullsec to get stuff out to home systems from Jita using JF-services will increase. This might be good, since it probably will increase the traffic using other means of transportations; Blockade Runners, using WHs from null to highsec etc. Gives more opportunities to hunt them and kill them. Nice! JF-services will have a decrease in business. At the same time, the powerblocks will more or less not be affected by the change when it comes to moving large fleets of caps/supers/Titans. They can and will continue to project power all over the known EVE-universe whenever needed/wanted. At the same time, the "threats" to sov and structures/POSes will decrease, making the polarization of nullsec even more accentuated. The "rebells/freedomfighters/terrorists" like BL, Pasta etc will not have the same impact on the power blocks. This is bad, since many guud-fights will never happen. Decrease in content imminent? So, I think the change is mostly counter-productive; changes should make it easier and give more incenvtives to smaller gangs to use their caps in anger. But as always, it also opens up new interesting possiblities. I guess Darwins laws will sort all out; those best in adapting to new situations will prevail and prosper. The rest will receive the "Darwin awards" of EVE and go extinct. ...fetching pop-corns, looking at the continuation of the 'topes-show...
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 76	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 - [290] - Quote xXFreshnessXx wrote: No Changes Dreads - no cost increase as they have more mass and less jump range than carriers, not too mention no drone bays or utility slots. Color me shocked that someone from Black Legion doesn't want their ability to drop 100 dreads on something nerfed in any way.
Mr Hyde113 Origin. Black Legion. 130	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 - [291] - Quote Wait, you guys have got time to tinker around with fuel cost and volume but you don't have enough time to give the Revelation a real second bonus? Priorities
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 660	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:28:00 - [292] - Quote Mr Hyde113 wrote: Wait, you guys have got time to tinker around with fuel cost and volume but you don't have enough time to give the Revelation a real second bonus? Priorities it has a real second bonus.
Denarus Arran Point Precision Circle-Of-Two 14	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:29:00 - [293] - Quote Just going to post my views on what I believe the outcome of these changes will be. CPP Fozzie's list of goals will be used as a Juxtaposition. Quote: 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. -Are ice miners really doing that poorly? With the changes to refinement it's likely more POS are going to be put up in highsec. Even if players are going to be using smaller POS there will be more of them. The increase in Rorqual use will also increase the use of heavy water (usually seen as a by-product of ice mining rather then a commodity) which will increase further the profits available from Ice mining. Quote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. -Increasing cost competitiveness by increasing import/export cost doesn't mean anyone in the areas will be better off. It just means a higher cost of living the further you are from highsec. Nullsec and Highsec economies will always be connected all this will do is push indy players back towards highsec where profit margins will be better. Quote: 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. -Doubtful this will work. Cost vs. reward of running around in caps won't make this tactic any less viable for the power blocs. All this will hurt is nullsec industry and smaller nomadic corps and alliances. You're never going to be able to sever the connection between high, low and null industry. Raising fuel consumption on capital ships will not further your goals. Please reconsider your generic 50% increase and look at each ship independently. After seeing how carefully other ships were rebalanced I'm a bit taken aback by you slapping a generic number on such a large change number of ships and saying 'see how she goes we'll sort it out later.' PEWPEWPEW
tigger digger DeepSpace Manufacturers Brothers of Tangra 6	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:31:00 - [294] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. How is an Amarr jump freighter pilot supposed to use "local resources" in Gallente space?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 447	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:41:00 - [295] - Quote tigger digger wrote: How is an Amarr jump freighter pilot supposed to use "local resources" in Gallente space? Don't ask him questions he cannot answer, that's unfair discrimination!
CorryBasler Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 74	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:41:00 - [296] - Quote CCP ruining eve-online 1 bad idea at a time.
Wal-Mart Security58 School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:42:00 - [297] - Quote My confusion comes with some of the misguided comments that CCP has made in the past about trying to make 0.0 more accessible and survivable for smaller corporations/alliances. This directly goes against that effort (if it ever truly existed). It seems at times that you (CCP) go out of your way to push people out of the game. I don't quite understand why this change was needed, or what it accomplishes, aside from making 0.0 life more difficult for the smaller corporations/alliances. If that was your goal, then great job.
gascanu Bearing Srl. 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:48:00 - [298] - Quote Wal-Mart Security58 wrote: My confusion comes with some of the misguided comments that CCP has made in the past about trying to make 0.0 more accessible and survivable for smaller corporations/alliances. This directly goes against that effort (if it ever truly existed). It seems at times that you (CCP) go out of your way to push people out of the game. I don't quite understand why this change was needed, or what it accomplishes, aside from making 0.0 life more difficult for the smaller corporations/alliances. If that was your goal, then great job. No no, they are trying to make ppl leave empire and go live in 0.0.... into 0.0 large coalitions more exactlly, since those will not be affected at all at member lvl; bigger 0.0 coalitions> bigger 0.0 fights >bigger news about CCP
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 77	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:50:00 - [299] - Quote One group of people who will 100% benefit from these changes that we haven't heard much from in this thread so far: Wormhole natives.
Alekseyev Karrde Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group 1441	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:52:00 - [300] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: [list] 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. After having read the latest blog that having additional facilities in your POS will provide some meaningful benefits, I'm not sure this is a definite enough prediction to base a change on. Perhaps a short "wait and see" period before CCP directly intervenes in the market? "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart." -Arydanika, Voices from the Void Hero of the CSM Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1298	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:53:00 - [301] - Quote This is a huge change to balace the game. Thank you. The Tears Must Flow
Sato Page BLOORDOGY Dead Space Syndicate 12	Posted - 2014.04.29 17:56:00 - [302] - Quote Thanks Obama!
Talos Katuma Helion Production Labs Independent Operators Consortium 12	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:00:00 - [303] - Quote I'm getting the feeling this is one more stone that pushes 0.0 for being big coalitions only.
Shu Guang Intergalactic Fender benders Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns 12	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:00:00 - [304] - Quote Welcome to another episode of dumb and dumber. Rubicon 1.1 - CCP celebrates ClusterF**K day.-á
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1298	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:03:00 - [305] - Quote The first step to fix power projection. The Tears Must Flow
Dave Stark 5194	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:09:00 - [306] - Quote tinfoil time. so now everyone has switched to caldari shield capitals, let's hike the prices of all the isotopes. i mean, it's not like it's going to give the CFC a nitrogen isotope monopoly-.. oh, wait....
Viribus Love Squad Pasta Syndicate 237	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:09:00 - [307] - Quote Thanks for fixing nullsec industry! Now if I want to move my Naglfar I can simply mine the ice belts of Delve for the abundant Hydrogen Isotopes they contain!!!
Chase Hakoke Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 17	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:12:00 - [308] - Quote This is a good change, but I don't think it goes far enough. What we need is to have a tax imposed on every jump that goes straight into CFC or PL coffers. Instead of doing all this backend programming work with fuel usage and cargo increases... we can get right to the meat of the issue: ******* over the little guy. I'm sure my PL and CFC broskis will agree that this change is for the best.
Easthir Ravin Easy Co. Fatal Ascension 88	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:13:00 - [309] - Quote Why do we hate the free market so much. This just crushes small Corporations Logistical Cost. Way to punish capability. Instead of insentivizing success CCP in their socialist wisdom, miss the mark. IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES: -á" I drank WHAT?!"
Aefolatt Amos Itoga xX-Crusader-Xx Li3 Federation 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:13:00 - [310] - Quote It looks like CCP is getting their money back for failure of World of Darkness. 40% price increase of PLEX, buy ships for real money, now increasing prices of fuel etc.... It does not look like: "In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. " More like: we want you to spend more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ :D
1Robert McNamara1 The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 58	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:14:00 - [311] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Please take a step back and examine this closer. This change impacts: Ice compression (pretty big nerf to this) Fuel Block compression (now an expansion) Does nothing to help PI people impacted by the 'pre-buff' to the ice market anticipating mass POS withdraw Overall: Not convinced the POS withdraw will be as massive, is there data to support this? If it is substantiated, what are you doing for PI markets to shore them up? I thought the Industry guys hadn't given final word on how to make multiple RnD/Build modules on a single POS an incentive... does this mean they've abandoned that model entirely? Coalitions like mine, apparently, have the scratch to deal with these price changes. Smaller 'bottom up' entities probably don't. - this increases the barrier to entry for new/starting groups.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 660	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:23:00 - [312] - Quote can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1298	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:24:00 - [313] - Quote 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. The Tears Must Flow
Mr Hyde113 Origin. Black Legion. 130	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:25:00 - [314] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Mr Hyde113 wrote: Wait, you guys have got time to tinker around with fuel cost and volume but you don't have enough time to give the Revelation a real second bonus? Priorities it has a real second bonus. No it doesn't.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 460	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:26:00 - [315] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions I'm not even really sure what the large nullsec coalition folks (including those in my own "blob coalition") are worried about. The cost increase is absolutely trivial and the logistics of carrying the fuel have not changed. The RZR dude has a fair point, though -- you may want to revisit compressed ice volumes and ensure they're brought in line with the changes made here. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Paul Tsukaya Tsukaya Light Industries 78	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:33:00 - [316] - Quote 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.
Dave Stark 5194	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:35:00 - [317] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions that's because changes like this have forced them to the brink of extinction, and even if they did post they're so rare and unheard of you wouldn't notice who they are anyway.
Dinsdale Pirannha Pirannha Corp 2830	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:36:00 - [318] - Quote Zeus Maximo wrote: I think Fozzie's board room meetings to discuss changes consists of him sitting in front of a mirror. This one change just nerfed all of the bonus's you gave null sec industry. Please..... 25 million ISK increase in transportation cost, 50 million round trip. And null sec is being handed a buff of at least 10%, maybe as high as 25%, when all factors are calculated, including the ones that the dev's have promised in the blog but not implemented. Even if your manufacturing costs have gone down only 10%, do you seriously expect anyone to believe you are still not making out like bandits? Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook.
xXFreshnessXx Origin. Black Legion. 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:38:00 - [319] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions Well you could say maybe it's because a lot of the "nullscrubs" as you put it don't want to be slaves of their masters and want more independence and the game is slowly making that a least viable option. I'd say almost every player in this game wants to be independent to a certain degree and possibly start a corp or alliance with one of their alts in hopes of it becoming something bigger or being able to live nomadic like and still plex their accounts. With changes like this they are being forced.. or rather more inclined to stay within there fat alliances or coalitions OR even perhaps join/merge in to one. Players want to play the game for free rather than be independent and subscribe their accounts, which tells you what they think of the game. All these changes scream, more blobs, coaltion members, more tidi, more inflation, more plex buying. Also you should be glad we are looking out for you, the little guys, smaller alliances and other players in general. Don't stop being cool. Follow me on Twitter @FR3SH0PShttps://twitter.com/FR3SH0PS
TheMercenaryKing StarFleet Enterprises StarFleet. 171	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:40:00 - [320] - 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. Power projection does need to be fixed. Personally I like an idea of where you need to wait 5 minutes after you jump before you can do it again, like how bomb launching works. But the issue here is what CCP Fozzie proposed is actually dumb. Quote: The goals of this change are: (changed to ordered list) 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. ....provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often. 1. Not many people will change the POSs, I can see some minor changes in high sec, but people with the small towers will be wardeced now that they must have the prints (Originals or copies) in the POS. The lower HP means its way, way easier to hit. 2. . First: Local resources, you only have one type of isotopes in a region, so this is already an invalid point. Second: People don't mine the isotopes because they are **** prices vs Dark glitter, CCP needs to either nerf it or modify all ice. 3. I said before, groups willing to use capitals typically replace them. If it is an alliance that hands out fuel (most do as far as i know when its an alliance op), that is maybe the cost of one dread reimbursement if they are moving +100 capitals. All CCP would do is make it harder for smaller groups or individuals. This change is a terrible idea and should be scrapped.
Kat Ayclism Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 222	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:47:00 - [321] - Quote I love when Fozzie drops terrible ideas and then disappears into the mists- it makes me feel like a valued customer of CCP.
FT Diomedes The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:50:00 - [322] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.[/b] The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Without get into whether this is a necessary or beneficial change... Should I bother to compress ice now? Seems like that removes some of the reason to compress. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 558	Posted - 2014.04.29 18:54:00 - [323] - Quote CCP - congrats you finally found that last nail. Looking forward to the layoffs next Christmas CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
Rena Senn Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound 99	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:01:00 - [324] - Quote Isn't jacking up industry export costs going to make nullsec production less competitive, not more? What are you even trying to do here, CCP?
Feuerm0nd UK Corp RAZOR Alliance 7	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:01:00 - [325] - Quote OK just to sum it up: Jumping any capital will be 50 % more expensive and bridging is still cheap as ****. Manufacturing in 00 was ment to be buffed with this expansion but it nerfed. Small alliances that could be a thread to any big coalition (and thus create content!!!!) are nerfed to ineffectiveness and their life is made even more expensive with this (Small alliances don-¦t have the money creating capabilities of big coalitions nor the ratting space for the members). Why don-¦t you increase the costs of bridging ships with titans? Now it will be worth jumping the first part with a JF to null and than just use titans that bridge your freighter (which can hold 3 times the goods than a JF) to the destination or maybe another "HUB" up in the 00 region where you can switch to a JF to get to the single systems withe the needed fuel /moongoods/materials. The solution is not to nerf fuel consumption on all capitals but to nerf certain capitals as they are a too big part of power projection. Titans are strategicly important for the movement of big fleets. Big 00 block have them which is fine. But it has to be somewhat expensive to have the advantage to move a fleet directly into the target system instead of moving it through gates. Also: Supers have the same base fuel usage than carriers but have a bigger mass and a bigger resource consumption for building. Why do supers need as much fuel as normal carriers for the same jump? Shouldn-¦t be Titans with their extremely useful strategic options and supers which are important for current 00 warfere/sov warefare be using more fuel so if big alliances use them they pay for the big advantage? Don-¦t nerf the 00 industry you just try to improve. The minerals you get more with a fully upgraded outpost in 00 are useless if it is too expensive to move the build mods or ships to Highsec/The warzone for actual use. Please don-¦t make the players do the same thing after you focussed too much on walking on stations. Find a way to create more conflicts because without any conflict eve will be boring and the industry (you just revamped) will die due to not enough ships been blown up in wars. Edit: Also you are nerfing the Blops gangs from small corps alliances that annoy big alliances and after the siphon I thgought ccp wants to improve guerilla warfare possibilities and not nerf them. PS: This is my personal opinion and not the one of my Alliance or Corparation.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1159	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:02:00 - [326] - Quote Rena Senn wrote: Isn't jacking up industry export costs going to make nullsec production less competitive, not more? What are you even trying to do here, CCP? They dont want you competing with highsec. They want highsec to supply (most) of highsec, and for nullsec industry to use local resources and produce for local needs.
Elise Randolph Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 1208	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:05:00 - [327] - Quote Man, poor Fozzie. The only way he'll get to 10k likes now is to delete capitals, or something massive to appease the clueless fools crying "power projection" every five minutes. ~
FT Diomedes The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 379	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:08:00 - [328] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Rena Senn wrote: Isn't jacking up industry export costs going to make nullsec production less competitive, not more? What are you even trying to do here, CCP? They dont want you competing with highsec. They want highsec to supply (most) of highsec, and for nullsec industry to use local resources and produce for local needs. Movement of things between high, low, and null creates more opportunities for mistake-driven content. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Rena Senn Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound 99	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:09:00 - [329] - Quote Michael Harari wrote: Rena Senn wrote: Isn't jacking up industry export costs going to make nullsec production less competitive, not more? What are you even trying to do here, CCP? They dont want you competing with highsec. They want highsec to supply (most) of highsec, and for nullsec industry to use local resources and produce for local needs. So in other words a flat out consumption tax nerf to anyone living outside of null, which includes not just highsec carebears but also lowsec and wormhole dwellers who won't have nullsec docking rights or sufficient risk/reward incentive to purchase out of null even if things are cheaper there.
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5047	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:10:00 - [330] - Quote Why can't my bucket hold all these bloc tears?! .
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 663	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:10:00 - [331] - Quote Elise Randolph wrote: Man, poor Fozzie. The only way he'll get to 10k likes now is to delete capitals, or something massive to appease the clueless fools crying "power projection" every five minutes. more like you're a clueless fool
Ren Coursa Rapid Withdrawal 9	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:16:00 - [332] - Quote I'am twelve and what is this. I don't have a clue what all this means since i just fly frigs and blow up. But it's interesting to read the drama and it is also interesting to note the absence of Fozzie. He would do well in facing the critizism head on, explain and argue his point. This expansion seems to be turning into crazyness when you read peoples reactions to the industry stuff and now this. Gonna be an interesting summer. //Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Dave Stark 5195	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:16:00 - [333] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Why can't my bucket hold all these bloc tears?! feedback; now classed as tears.
Amely Miles Exiled Tech 10	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:21:00 - [334] - Quote MagnusBraxx wrote: Dear ccp fozzie...I don't like you. you are a ***! +1
Nys Cron Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 20	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:33:00 - [335] - Quote Another change that punishes smaller groups for using capitals and won't really hurt big alliances with nearly unlimited resources.
1Robert McNamara1 The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 60	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:38:00 - [336] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions Fair critique. I presume smaller groups have less income to manage fuel costs like this. I'll strike it from my posts and link your comment.
Amera Khan Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous 6	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:38:00 - [337] - Quote This is a horrible change. Small entities will suffer the most from this and it will barely affect big alliances. This will not have an impact on power projection of massive capital fleets, it just hurts nullsec logistics and smaller entities.
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 692	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:39:00 - [338] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! [b]The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. On rare ocassions, CCP come up with a half-sensible idea. Its a shame that they are far outweighed by the idiotic and dim-witted ones such as this. God.
Vadeim Rizen TYR. Exodus. 40	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:41:00 - [339] - Quote can we get a slight slight reduction in the amount of fuel pos's use to compensate slightly for this? not only is the ice going to become more expensive meaning fuel is going to go up, but it's also going to be more expensive for the jita runs for the fuel. i only have/want 1 tower and it barely pays for itself as it is. the profitablity of moon goo is bad enough as it is.
OptimuzPR Oblivious Elements Collide Carthage Empires 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:44:00 - [340] - Quote Lady Isabell wrote: Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. ^^ Also if you really wanted to impact fuel (isotopes) for towers you could: Increase isotopes needed to produce fuel blocks (from 400 to 500 maybe?) This would impact towers directly that you are trying(??) to change without effecting logistics/jump drives/portals as much. 100% agree with Apollo there, Fozzie dropped the ball on this one! It's not broken yet and you are trying to fix it? Lady Isabell's solution is far better if anything happens at all.
PotatoOverdose Handsome Millionaire Playboys 1716	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:44:00 - [341] - Quote Hi! Let's make Logistics, one of the most mind numbingly unrewarding yet necessary time sinks in Eve online 50% more expensive. This will "help" null sec industry and simultaneously "encourage" smaller entities to get involved in null. Oh, and we're doing this for very good reasons that are supported by empirical evidence, not baseless conjecture, assumption, and speculation regarding a given market's predicted behavior. *This is clearly a very* good idea.**
PotatoOverdose Handsome Millionaire Playboys 1720	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:46:00 - [342] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: can't help but notice that all of the 'but it will hurt small alliances!' objections are from enormous nullscrub blob coalitions Small alliance dude checking in. F*** these changes.
Marius8 DNS Requiem Brothers of Tangra 5	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:47:00 - [343] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. it will more likely an increase, due to opening all systems for POS towers! Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. probably won't happen this way, because people use "best" ship for their needs, not the "regional optimal" because you can the ice there 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. yes, it would be more expensive,but the big alliances give a "**" on higher cost of moving their fleets! So it will mostly effect the small Alliances, and the usage of JFs. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. IF you truly want to do it, please do it in the first or second point release, after that time it should be obvious, if this change is really necessary!** To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. this change becomes unnecessary, if the increased fuel usage doesn't come. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. this would be also obsolete For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. with this announcement, the isotope prices are already rising, so when the change summer expansion hits TQ it will be more likely: price summer before expansion transit costs 75m isk; after change transit costs 112,5m isk for those, who don't want to do the math: that's around 2,25 times the cost than now (125% more) the bolts are my two cents to it!
xXFreshnessXx Origin. Black Legion. 3	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:47:00 - [344] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Why can't my bucket hold all these bloc tears?! Is that sarcasm, because this is not going to dent their or your wallet.. Follow me on Twitter @FR3SH0PShttps://twitter.com/FR3SH0PS
Dukt Tapir ManyTargetsMuchAmmo Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:52:00 - [345] - Quote This is going to force a serious change in small corps staying in DEEP space. Too much cost to move out and work there long enough to start making money to stay already. I applaud the effort to make deep space more self sufficent, but small corp's normally need to go to high sec often to purchase items they either can't build or do not have the skills infrastructure to create. I think this whole idea is poorly aimed. It would encourage people to move to deeper space if there was less barrier to entry not more. This whole game and many of the changes seem to favor larger alliances and not smaller groups.
FT Diomedes The Graduates RAZOR Alliance 380	Posted - 2014.04.29 19:58:00 - [346] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Why can't my bucket hold all these bloc tears?! So, since Fozzie has not, explain why or how this is a well-considered and necessary change. I know you hate power projection, but does this actually work towards nerfing a coalition's ability to project power? Even if so, doesn't it cause more harm to other things than is necessary? This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
T'rixie Criminally Incompetent Baja Panti Mafia 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:05:00 - [347] - Quote PotatoOverdose wrote: Small alliance dude checking in. F*** these changes. This is my first post after 4 years of playing but this needs to be echoed so here I am: unless there's more evidence than supplied in your post, Fozzie, I fear this is an unpredictable at best and terrible at worst change to make this way. My corpie and I ran the only real JF service for a renter corp in Paragon Soul for the better part of a year and a half. We ran loot/ABC/salvage/production out and we ran fuels, ships, materials, and ammo back in. We did it because we liked living out on the edge of nowhere, but I don't think in all that time we were ever really profitable on any level with those runs. The run to/from highsec to PS cost about 100 million isk round-trip at the time at market value for 'topes, and that was using the direct (& higher risk) route. For a small corp trying to make a go of Nullsec - which is what CCP is claiming to be all about boosting now - I don't see how requiring more fuel for these runs or in general making logistics more expensive or difficult is going to do anything but make it even harder for these groups to survive. I don't think anyone can say what effect all the industry changes are really going to have on isotopes until it plays out. Let it play out - there's no rush on "saving the ice miners" over the next few months. TL;DR: Please consider what many others in this thread have already said: hold off on fuel changes until you guys see how the market responds; the unintended consequences here may be significant.
Scorpio DK FireStar Inc Evictus. 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:09:00 - [348] - Quote this is completely and totally pointless and will not have the effect you are intending for it, reconsider it
Kathao Crendraven GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 6	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:21:00 - [349] - Quote FINALLY! I was waiting for this change for so long. Finally I'm able to spend more money on fuel! I was actually crying over my satisfaction. Also, screw small alliances. No one cares. -á
Shinnan Krydu Hedion University Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:24:00 - [350] - Quote Does anybody really think, looking at the overall industry changes, that there won't be a wild proliferation of POS towers in empire? How can that possibly square with the stated intention of picking up "slack" in the isotope market? I think with this change we see the true direction of the industry changes. At first, I believed, as did many others, that the purpose was to move more profitable industry activity to nullsec. Now, I think that what CCP is trying to do is nothing less than an attempt to tear down Jita and decentralize the EVE economy. There will be limited value in the old model of nullsec as an exporter of raw materials and an importer of finished goods. Likewise, there will be limited value in simply relocating industry operations to a nullsec locale and continuing business as usual. With transportation costs for moving materials and finished goods moving skyward (and likely to go higher) long distance commerce will quickly be limited to modules, blueprints, and compressed ore. If CCP really, really wants nullsec to cut the Empire apron strings, though, the next thing we need is the removal of a racial preference for isotopes from capital ships. KInd of makes you wonder: when we build Seagull's stargates, what kind of place are we going to? And will we be able to come back? Because it looks to me like CCP wants player organizations to be able to be pretty much self sufficient from the rest of the EVE universe.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 560	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:27:00 - [351] - Quote Shinnan Krydu wrote: KInd of makes you wonder: when we build Seagull's stargates, what kind of place are we going to? And will we be able to come back? Because it looks to me like CCP wants player organizations to be able to be pretty much self sufficient from the rest of the EVE universe. Pretty much think CCP looking to be more than sufficient from our wallets. CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5048	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:28:00 - [352] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Why can't my bucket hold all these bloc tears?! So, since Fozzie has not, explain why or how this is a well-considered and necessary change. I know you hate power projection, but does this actually work towards nerfing a coalition's ability to project power? Even if so, doesn't it cause more harm to other things than is necessary? Wish I could answer your question with data only CCP would know. I just felt like poking fun at all the bloc alliances crying over this change. One question I would like to know is this: What is the average isotope consumption per member of each alliance. What coalition do they belong to? Does it increase or decrease as the alliance becomes bigger? Only CCP will know those numbers. In the meantime I will continue to laugh at coalition members who pretend to give a **** about independent small alliances. .
Fredric Wolf Black Sheep Down Tactical Narcotics Team 60	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:37:00 - [353] - Quote My only thoughts opinion on this is I think that isotope consumption amount on capital class vessels needs to be looked at. Currently Carriers, Dreads, Supercarriers, and Titans use the same amount of isotopes per light year of jump. I would change this to account for the mass of the ships moving. I would use 1500 for carriers, 2000 for dreads, 3000 for Super carriers, and 5000 for titans. I think it should cost more per jump to move larger ships around then it does currently. Carriers fuel bay could stay the same. Dreads would need a slight increase to make up for the increase of fuel used as you are increasing from base 25% then 25% larger fuel bay would be 10k m3, supercarriers would also need a 10k M3 fuel bay. titans have a massive fuel bay currently so I do not know if this would need to be increased with my idea. I think this would help the game and also help with power projection as right now you can move any of the combat capitals with the same cost in fuel for greatly different massed ships.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 450	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:40:00 - [354] - Quote Shinnan Krydu wrote: KInd of makes you wonder: when we build Seagull's stargates, what kind of place are we going to? And will we be able to come back? Because it looks to me like CCP wants player organizations to be able to be pretty much self sufficient from the rest of the EVE universe. The self-sufficiency is already there, ignoring the moon minerals that need to be imported due to CCP genius. However, no one cares because not being self-sufficient is so much easier.
gascanu Bearing Srl. 105	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:42:00 - [355] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! [b]The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. . i think this is one of those steps to decrease server lag. you know, like nerfing omnidirectional tracking links...
Emmy Mnemonic Svea Rike Fatal Ascension 14	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:51:00 - [356] - Quote Hold your horses! Is there some OTHER change that CCP has not yet revelaed that will make POSes dissapear from the game "en masse" that requires some rebalancing to the isotopes?! Something CCP will only reveal at fanfest perhaps? Now, let's see here...where are POSes used the most....moon-mining and reactions maybe? I also saw a new type of mining-frigate linked in-game, a greenish-looking variant of the Venture. 1+1=3 right? Maybe ringmining for valuable minerals?! Find your R64:s in the ring-belts? ;-)
Evelgrivion Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder 295	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:53:00 - [357] - Quote The net effect of these changes seem to be nudging people to invest in local economies if they can, such as mining local ores and ice. Isotopes are still divided by regions; anyone operating an off-race capital, black-ops ship, jump freighter, or tower is going to have to import fuel. Is this something that should be changed for improving the localization of nullsec economies?
Migui X'hyrrn Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 85	Posted - 2014.04.29 20:55:00 - [358] - Quote If the proposal will change after a post, then it has not been thought deeply enough. it is more like "what if..." You want to make eve bigger and 0.0 be more self dependent, etc. Thats great. But it is the same as if you duplicate the price of the plane ticket. What happens? The poor guy can't afford it. The rich doesn't give a ****. If you downgrade the airplane speed, then the distance becomes more relevant. Want to nerf power projection? Then say it openly and think a way so that NUMBERS is not the answer for everything.
Hexatron Ormand Aperture Deep Space BORG Alliance 61	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:05:00 - [359] - Quote Quote: 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. I was writing in other industry related posts already that POS users seem to get shafted a bit. This here seems to be like some official acknowledgement that POSes will be baaaaaaaad after summer patch. Why else should there be a fear that only small POSes will be left, or that so many disappear from the game, that they need to enhance the jump drive isotope consumption to keep the ice price up?? What about the new refining arrays, the compressions arrays? Won't this lead to more corps putting up a POS than before, even if it is only a small one? Shouldn't that already even out things? If not... maybe it is the POS mechanics that needs some bad upgrades, instead of making the jump fuel more expensive? This seems to be a huge step into the wrong direction. Killing all the small alliances, small corps that may have trouble in the long run with those increased prices. Mining it themself in nullsec may not be an option.. not everyone holds systems that offer ice, and even if they do, it may not be said that it offers the right isotopes. Players like to fly all sort of ships, so the "work for your own isotopes in your own nullsec" argument seems to be a big fail - unless you plan on adding all 4 empire istopes to every ice belt in the game.
WhiteSleeve Poor Old Ornery nOObs Brothers of Tangra 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:11:00 - [360] - Quote Resgo wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Resgo wrote: Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size. At first glance this appears to be an excellent idea. Though if you'd like to increase the size of the fuel bay on top of it, it'd be much appreciated. My fleet hangar always seems to be full of fuel due to the fuel bay being undersized to begin with. So far I've been going through these and the thought that keeps occurring to me is this. Fuel bays should increase to match the increase in fuel requirements to complete a jump. Reducing the volume of isotopes seems to be half of the solution. Whether people carry more fuel in other parts of their ships can be revisited I'm sure. As far as the key to this being people keeping up the Ice demand because of POS fuels, why not just increase the isotope requirement for fuel blocks instead of going after capitals in this fashion? The idea that because people will use fewer isotopes because they'll use smaller towers so lets make it so that jump capable ships need more fuel to travel.... To quote a dinosaur from one of my children's favorite movies "I don't think this plan was thought through very well". This also does not address the issues of having ships that use fuels that are unavailable in their parts of space. Such as Any race other than the area that you live. So if you want to increase competition, I've seen suggestions for making the 0.0 belts larger, having them have a greater variety of ice (You've got the major type for that area of space, and then why wouldn't there be smaller amounts of all types in those areas? maybe you don't get the good stuff for 0.0 ice in an out of area belt but the stuff found in hi sec) for a given belt. I'll admit I may be missing something. But that's my first thought. At least increasing the requirements for fuel blocks would make some sort of sense with the changes coming from industry (factory or research POS module changes requiring more isotopes of whatever type to produce the happy glow lights that they need to run off of those pos's or whatever). This sounds like this should be a POS related change, not a Capital related change. And if you're going to go through all of that, why aren't Jump Freighters given the Ability to jump farther if you're going to nerf their fuel costs, at least you should give them some longer legs in the process. A little give with the take, as it were.
El Geo Pathfinders. Veni Vidi Vici Alliance 196	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:23:00 - [361] - Quote I don't even know how this is supposed to stop power projection in the slightest but I know it will make life as a solo/small group nomadic player more expensive, as for effecting larger alliances well, who is making these changes? path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions. http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
Money Makin Mitch Paid in Full 326	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:24:00 - [362] - Quote wow. when you guys announced the fighter changes and etc., i jokingly predicted you would next 'fix' projection by doubling fuel costs and changing their volume. i say jokingly predicted, because it was literally some ****** ** i thought up of on the fly to throw on the wall for lulz.
El Geo Pathfinders. Veni Vidi Vici Alliance 196	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:26:00 - [363] - Quote Migui X'hyrrn wrote: If the proposal will change after a post, then it has not been thought deeply enough. it is more like "what if..." You want to make eve bigger and 0.0 be more self dependent, etc. Thats great. But it is the same as if you duplicate the price of the plane ticket. What happens? The poor guy can't afford it. The rich doesn't give a ****. If you downgrade the airplane speed, then the distance becomes more relevant. Want to nerf power projection? Then say it openly and think a way so that NUMBERS is not the answer for everything. Never thought i'd see myself agree with so many big alliance players before but it does seem that reading through this thread a tonne of people feel the same. path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions. http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
Rittel Band of Valence 4	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:38:00 - [364] - Quote El Geo wrote: I don't even know how this is supposed to stop power projection in the slightest but I know it will make life as a solo/small group nomadic player more expensive, as for effecting larger alliances well, who is making these changes? It probably doesn't, the bigger alliances out there can probably absorb the costs and some (if not most) usually do fuel repayment for alliance sponsored operations. Definitely makes it more expensive for them but its not as if they are struggling. What it does it hit is the smaller members of the coalitions, renters and smaller independent alliances who need to run logistics potentially to areas like Branch, Cobalt Edge or some other far off land. I can also see it hitting the indy guys who build out in low sec (caps etc) who JF stuff around. I know for the last few years CCP have said they want to try and push more indy out into Low and Null but buggering around with compression and fuel seems to be going the opposite way.
Iron Breaker Banana Mining Inc. Brothers of Tangra 11	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:43:00 - [365] - Quote If you want more fuel to be used, how about making it less of a hassle to move a carrier? You pretty much need 2-3 accounts to move a carrier anywhere. Or a bunch of friends that don't mind getting killed lighting off a cyno. while they are stuck waiting for the timer to run out. I have had my carrier 3-4 years and have only jumped it 5 times. Twice after I bought it, and three times to get it out to null sec, and there it sits, to big a hassle to do much with. Every station should automatically have a Cyno in it that needs little or no fuel, that only members of that Corp/Alliance can jump to. If you want to jump to a system that is not part of your corp. or alliance, then, you need someone to sneak in a and light a beacon for you. The current system is frustrating and silly.
Gizan Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra 86	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:43:00 - [366] - Quote So, if im mining, i have 900BILLION units of zydrine, and megacyte, that i cant get rid of because you're about to increase the cost to move it to highsec, so my only affordable way is to find a wormhole to get it back to highsec cheap? F you ccp..... its been downhill since
Rattman Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition. 25	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:45:00 - [367] - Quote Evelgrivion wrote: The net effect of these changes seem to be nudging people to invest in local economies if they can, such as mining local ores and ice. Isotopes are still divided by regions; anyone operating an off-race capital, black-ops ship, jump freighter, or tower is going to have to import fuel. Is this something that should be changed for increasing the localization of nullsec economies? But if they want to go this way why have ice specific to an area, if so ice belts need to be randomised so that all ice types apear in any belt, if you are want people to mine nullsec ice then make ice that people want to mine
luredivino Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 43	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:51:00 - [368] - Quote This isnt going to do anything to large alliance power projection. Alliances that can replace titans like they are nothing, aren't going to care about a 50% increase in fuel costs. It will prevent small to mid size alliances from using caps or blops. Great change....
Elequent-Lady Dolorous Marchwarden 0	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:52:00 - [369] - Quote This strikes me as a very poorly thought out change. Please wait to see how the market reacts to the changes you have already planned before you take measures such as this. They likely won't be necessary at all due to the fact you are removing the standing requirement for starbases and requiring more use of starbases for manufacturing. Yes, the "e" was intentional.-á
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 463	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:52:00 - [370] - Quote Emmy Mnemonic wrote: Hold your horses! Is there some OTHER change that CCP has not yet revelaed that will make POSes dissapear from the game "en masse" that requires some rebalancing to the isotopes?! Something CCP will only reveal at fanfest perhaps? Now, let's see here...where are POSes used the most....moon-mining and reactions maybe? I also saw a new type of mining-frigate linked in-game, a greenish-looking variant of the Venture. 1+1=3 right? Maybe ringmining for valuable minerals?! Find your R64:s in the ring-belts? ;-) Naw. What's going on is that the removal of slots in Research And Manufacturing (RAM) job is making it so you can get the same amount of POS work done with far fewer POS modules. This will lead to a reduction in the average size of RAM poses, as you just don't need to pay for as much CPU/grid as before. It will also lead to the removal of a number of these poses, as some may find existing station facilities to be "good enough" for their needs. Further removals will occur due to the nerfing of remote research and production at a POS from a locked down blueprint at a station in the system. All of these lead to a drawdown in the amount of topes being consumed. The change being proposed here compensates for a portion of this drawdown. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Michael Harari Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED 1159	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:55:00 - [371] - Quote Emmy Mnemonic wrote: Hold your horses! Is there some OTHER change that CCP has not yet revelaed that will make POSes dissapear from the game "en masse" that requires some rebalancing to the isotopes?! Something CCP will only reveal at fanfest perhaps? Now, let's see here...where are POSes used the most....moon-mining and reactions maybe? I also saw a new type of mining-frigate linked in-game, a greenish-looking variant of the Venture. 1+1=3 right? Maybe ringmining for valuable minerals?! Find your R64:s in the ring-belts? ;-) Thats a very good point, and is part of the problem of releasing interwoven changes piecemeal
Thead Enco 47th Ronin 160	Posted - 2014.04.29 21:56:00 - [372] - Quote Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: Capqu wrote: Querns wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Thinking on this, there's one outlier -- jump bridges. You may want to go forward with actually increasing the bay size on this, as messing with the volume of LO3 has some hilarious knockbacks related to cynos that you probably don't want. (Non-expanded interceptor cynos, anyone?) isotopes aren't liquid ozone you dumb GOON Uh, yeah, but he said they aren't increasing bay sizes any more. I'm saying still do it for the Jump Bridge. Gosh. how should i know how jump bridges work u took our fuckin sov They may have taken your lands, But you still have........"Your FREEEEDOOOOOOOOM" -á"A Lannister always pays his debts." -áTyrion Lannister
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 307	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:02:00 - [373] - Quote Rittel wrote: It probably doesn't, the bigger alliances out there can probably absorb the costs and some (if not most) usually do fuel repayment for alliance sponsored operations. Definitely makes it more expensive for them but its not as if they are struggling. What it does it hit is the smaller members of the coalitions, renters and smaller independent alliances who need to run logistics potentially to areas like Branch, Cobalt Edge or some other far off land. I can also see it hitting the indy guys who build out in low sec (caps etc) who JF stuff around. I know for the last few years CCP have said they want to try and push more indy out into Low and Null but buggering around with compression and fuel seems to be going the opposite way. It also hurts individual members. The reason is in your first paragraph. We reimburse fuel for alliance ops. Extracurricular activities is on your own dime.
Cekle Skyscales X-Prot Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere 36	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:05:00 - [374] - Quote Calorn Marthor wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. Are you aware that this is very close to making fuel blocks questionable? Currently it takes 217.6m-¦ of materials to make 40 fuel blocks which have a total volume of 200m-¦. 60m-¦ thereof are isotopes which means you are here cutting the bill of materials by 20m-¦. Instead of compressing the stuff, you are now inflating it a tiny bit (197.6m-¦->200m-¦). Especially when Jump Freighter transports get more expensive, fuel blocks should be SMALLER than their components - otherwise people would just transport the materials and then assemble the fuel blocks at the destination (which would pretty much defeat the original purpose why fuel blocks were invented in the first place). While I think this proposed change will not outweigh the convenience factor yet, it will definitely incentivize local PI and fuel block production (especially in combination with the announced 5% material bonus in starbases). Still people's own decision, but players who want to play "optimal" may feel the need to return to the messy pre-fuel-block-situation in terms of handling stuff PLUS the extra step of fuel block creation. Liquids become more voluminous when made solid. Put a can of soda in the freezer and find out for yourself.
Mihnea Tepes Astral Silence Surely You're Joking 31	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:07:00 - [375] - Quote lets **** it up more .... if you want any sugestions, just ask me just remember, especially make the plex even more expensive CCP, seriously, i dont understand your logic
Black Canary Jnr Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:08:00 - [376] - Quote 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. As i see it this is a BUFF to shallow 0.0. Oft described as '**** sov' it now has its time to shine by exporting to high sec with lower costs. Great! Less blopsing? Win in my books as someone who is in a blops hotspot. How many bombers could be blopsed in and out before and how many after? And provi doesn't really use caps except JF but i see it as an opportunity to import stuff for cheaper in blockade runners \o/ I have changed my OOC alts training to an Ark instead of an Anshar (extra like 1 day training, no biggie) JBs are still gonna be dirt cheap, if you can't afford to fuel a JB then you are hopeless, it's like an hour of mining DG for a few days fuel... So yeah, pretty good from where i'm sat in KBP. I'm worried about the true small groups in low sec like aridia who need JFs though. Low sec needs some love CCP!
Trespasser S0utherN Comfort DARKNESS. 28	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:28:00 - [377] - Quote No, just no. CCP SRSLY, Right now my JF route with Cal 5/Fuel 5/jf 4 from empire to 0.0 requires just shy of 60k topes ONE WAY. you want to bump it up to 90k topes ONE WAY?! Get out! It already costs enough to move around with capitals we dont need you screwing it up anymore so you have 3 options 1. Lower fuel useage for JF's by atleast 30% 2. Increase isotope supply buy 50% 3. LEAVE IT THE HELL ALONE
Kethry Avenger PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 120	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:37:00 - [378] - Quote If you did want to make isotope use the way to influence power projection... Would it be possible to have isotope use increase logarithmically or exponentially based on distance? Max range would then be more a limit of fuel bay size and such. Would take some balancing. But could add some interesting decisions I think. But I do think space is to small and power projection to easy.
Luxotor Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity 51	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:39:00 - [379] - Quote I would appreciate you taking a look at how this effects jump freighter based logistics. THE NIGHT IS DARK AND FULL OF TERRORS!
Luxotor Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity 51	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:42:00 - [380] - Quote Migui X'hyrrn wrote: If the proposal will change after a post, then it has not been thought deeply enough. it is more like "what if..." You want to make eve bigger and 0.0 be more self dependent, etc. Thats great. But it is the same as if you duplicate the price of the plane ticket. What happens? The poor guy can't afford it. The rich doesn't give a ****. If you downgrade the airplane speed, then the distance becomes more relevant. Want to nerf power projection? Then say it openly and think a way so that NUMBERS is not the answer for everything. This is a good post. THE NIGHT IS DARK AND FULL OF TERRORS!
The Djentleman Paulson Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 170	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:50:00 - [381] - Quote AS AN ELEITE BLACKOPS GROUP COMMANDER THIS IS RIDICULOUS AND AN UNWARRANTED ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO MY PLAYSTYLE ITS NOW GOING TO COST 50% MORE FOR MY BROS TO HAVE FUN FOR NO TANGIBLE BENEFIT THANKS CCP
The Djentleman Paulson Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 170	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:51:00 - [382] - Quote Black Canary Jnr wrote: Less blopsing? Win in my books as someone who is in a blops hotspot. How many bombers could be blopsed in and out before and how many after? LOL THIS IS ONE OF THE DUDES WE'RE BLOPSING ALL THE TIME edit: NUMBER OF BOMBERS IS THE SAME IT JUST COSTS 50% MORE AND YA WE DONT PLAN ON CHANGING OPERATIONAL STATUS WATCH UR BACK LOL
dark lollipop Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 8	Posted - 2014.04.29 22:56:00 - [383] - Quote This is bad news for blackops. It is already expensive to bridge as it is, moreover the limit on how many recons you can bridge because of cost/fuel bay space problems.
The Djentleman Paulson Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 174	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:04:00 - [384] - Quote dark lollipop wrote: This is bad news for blackops. It is already expensive to bridge as it is, moreover the limit on how many recons you can bridge because of cost/fuel bay space problems. no mate, you can literally bridge the exact same amount of bombers 1.5(Fuel Amount) * .66(Isotope Volume) = 0.99 and we all know 0.99 is really just 1
Albert Madullier Macabre Votum Northern Coalition. 1	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:08:00 - [385] - Quote for the love of god stop making things more expensive why are you trying to make this game into a "grind for isk simulator"? some of us have real lives and jobs and can't sit on eve grinding all day long
Sato Page BLOORDOGY Dead Space Syndicate 14	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:14:00 - [386] - Quote Can we get a dislike button already? This way CCP could get some real feedback.
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 568	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:17:00 - [387] - Quote Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: I hope this is just the beginning of the power projection nerf. Look at all the "Blue Donut" members whining already. I live in lowsec and I think this is an awful idea. The closest tie my alliance has to nullsec is the occasional batphone. Increasing isotope use of capitals in response to... what, an anticipated drop off in isotope use in towers? More towers will be put up as their usefulness increases and they are easier to use, so that isn't going to happen. It's not a power projection nerf, its just a stupid change. Come on Fozzie, you used to be great at these things, remember your ship rebalancing? How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Destroyer Draxx Astral Projection Inc. The Afterlife. 4	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:18:00 - [388] - Quote Albert Madullier wrote: why are you trying to make this game into a "grind for isk simulator"? some of us have real lives and jobs and can't sit on eve grinding all day long You really don't understand the situation? You always have an option to replace grinding for selling one PLEX... or two... or ten. Or you have other option
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 568	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:19:00 - [389] - Quote Paul Tsukaya wrote: I bet if I went back, I could find a thread where people complained that nerfing technetium would completely ruin the little guy I dare you to, no small entity owned Tech. Small entities DO use capitals. And jump freighters. And POSs. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Black Canary Jnr Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance 104	Posted - 2014.04.29 23:25:00 - [390] - Quote The Djentleman Paulson wrote: LOL THIS IS ONE OF THE DUDES WE'RE BLOPSING ALL THE TIME Nope, you're Blopsing all the idiots that were getting blopsed before you were even here. When are you moving in so we can return the favor? I bet HERO has more idiots than provi... just got to grind all that undefended sov LOL. It's only taken you like 3 weeks so far ;) At this rate NC. will need new pets, even EMP were more competent ... But back onto the topic. Power projection is due a nerf, it's just a matter of what gets nerfed. I'd rather pay more and retain jump ranges than be forced to make another jump (moving cyno alts) and pay more with no reduction in tope usage anyways. Somethings got to give and at least this way it's incentivising 0.0 and low ice mining of stuff other than DG.
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.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 467	Posted - 2014.04.30 03:54:00 - [421] - Quote Zomgnomnom wrote: 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. Man, for an "alliance" who lives in NPC Pure Blind, noted for its proximity to Empire, you sure are pent up about the changes. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 467	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:00:00 - [422] - Quote I'll give all you people a hint: you are not arguing particularly well towards getting the changes reversed. Here is a list of things you probably don't want to include in your argument: "small alliances" plex the subscription status of your account or imminent cancellation thereof the "sandbox" a litany of other, completely unrelated concerns that simply must be solved before the sacred cow can be touched Use of these terms cheapens your argument considerably. If you need a refresher course on how to argue for or against a change properly, feel free to peruse my posting history. I've got a pretty good track record when it comes to feedback successfully affecting the game. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Zomgnomnom Royal Black Watch Highlanders Mordus Angels 29	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:01:00 - [423] - Quote Querns wrote: Man, for an "alliance" who lives in NPC Pure Blind, noted for its proximity to Empire, you sure are pent up about the changes. A horrible change is a horrible change regardless of where one lives or what alliance they're a part of. I also haven't always lived in Pure Blind nor do I intend on living here forever. This is a horrible change no matter who/where you are.
Miss Everest Elysium Accord 4	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:09:00 - [424] - Quote NO! CCP NO! Gets rolled up holoreel BAD CCP BAD!
King Fu Hostile Imperial Collective Unsettled. 71	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:31:00 - [425] - 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. It was amusing for a few pages, but 20 pages of these monkeys repeating the same misconceptions and baseless whining is just sad.
Tore Vest 364	Posted - 2014.04.30 04:34:00 - [426] - Quote Strike... and miss CCP fozzie You are not hitting your mark with this No troll.
Katanagari Council of Grumpy Old Farts Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 06:17:00 - [427] - Quote Querns wrote: 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. People who mine topes won't benefit at all. There are two reasons for this: 1) The reduction in isotopes usage from towers will be offset by the increase in usage for jump fuel. That's the stated objective. So there will likely be no net increase in isotope demands or a sustained increase in isotope prices. There will be some movement in racial demands as caldari research towers are removed and archon jump costs increase. That is all. 2) The isotope price is actually set by other income producing activity in eve, such as mission running or ore mining. If the isotope prices become high enough Ice mining will attract enough players from other activities to bring to it back down. Bottom line is these changes hurt almost everyone permanently to avoid temporary pain for the ice miners. Consider the alternative where lower demand (from a reduced number of towers) sends the isotope prices down - It just means some ice miners will mine something else, supply will shrink and the price will bounce back. Likely within the space of a couple of months. What's the harm in that? The other two goals of this change are: GÇó Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. This will actually do the opposite, the cost of importation will always set the price difference between null and highsec. Even if more people are attracted to build in null because of higher margins the only competition will be importers. So instead of importing for X, people will now build for X +20%. Why is that better? GÇó 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. If increased jump fuel costs even bother alliances with huge capital fleets, then I'm certain that power projection will be the last thing to be trimmed in the budget. Various member benefits (the rewards for being in a huge bloc) will be cut first, actually driving people back to hisec, or out of the game.
Rena Senn Resurrection Ventures Un.Bound 99	Posted - 2014.04.30 06:26:00 - [428] - Quote Querns wrote: I'll give all you people a hint: you are not arguing particularly well towards getting the changes reversed. Here is a list of things you probably don't want to include in your argument: "small alliances" plex the subscription status of your account or imminent cancellation thereof the "sandbox" a litany of other, completely unrelated concerns that simply must be solved before the sacred cow can be touched Use of these terms cheapens your argument considerably. If you need a refresher course on how to argue for or against a change properly, feel free to peruse my posting history. I've got a pretty good track record when it comes to feedback successfully affecting the game. How well would this argument have gone down if it was posted during the summer of rage? You don't think these factors are relevant? Fine. That's for you to prove. Trying to blatantly shape the narrative by insisting anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot for even raising such concerns is only going to entrench opinions against you further. But then again maybe that's exactly what you want. This "us versus the pubbies" song and dance always plays well with the home crowd, regardless of the actual validity of other people's concerns.
Gorski Car ElitistOps Pandemic Legion 271	Posted - 2014.04.30 06:36:00 - [429] - Quote Well I guess I am no longer going to use Black Frog for logistics thats for sure. #GORSKI4CSM https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4265138#post4265138
Joker Dronemaster Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Nulli Secunda 36	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:18:00 - [430] - Quote So let me get this straight.......... You make it so that anyone who wants to mine in highsec needs to have a pos; and make it possible by removing standings requirements. Which should cause a massive increase in demand for POS fuel. You get worried about a demand decrease in POS fuel and then nerf fuel consumption for jump drives to protect isotope prices. I R CONFUSED!!!!!!!!! Question. Will CCP pay for the hospital bills of all the 0.0 Ice miners who get priapisms from the price spike?
Dairokuten Maoh Pwn 'N Play Nulli Secunda 24	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:25:00 - [431] - Quote Instead of tweaking things left and right and pushing the StarCitizen to be more viable. How about someone in CCP kick this Fozzie dude out of office. S+Öpü«sëìpü½S¦¦pü»täípüÅpÇüS+Öpü«s+îpü½pééS¦¦pü»täípüù Before me, nobody stands. Behind me, nobody stood.
gascanu Bearing Srl. 106	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:25:00 - [432] - Quote Fozzie? HELLO! Fozzie, you still around man?
Althalus Stenory Flying Blacksmiths 8	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:30:00 - [433] - Quote The more is announced, the more I think this summer will sux...
Jena Jamson Pwn 'N Play Nulli Secunda 56	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:39:00 - [434] - Quote Don't you see all the negative responses here? WE DONT WANT IT! CCP LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYER BASE WHO ACTUALLY PLAYS THE GAME!
gascanu Bearing Srl. 107	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:42:00 - [435] - Quote Althalus Stenory wrote: The more is announced, the more I think this summer will sux... to be honest the number of changes looks insane, and based on previous experience i'm pretty sure something will go wrong; last time when CCP tried something like this was when they introduced the new "improved" united inventory... and we all know how that went... it took them about what, 6 months to fix the things that where not broken but the new "improved" version broke; really, looking at the summer expansion... crossed fingers X
TigerXtrm Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance 639	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:42:00 - [436] - Quote I don't like this change much either. I fail to see or understand how increasing everyone's fuel cost, and by extension the prices of goods outside of high-sec, is a good thing. I'm open to a good explanation though, maybe it'll change my opinion. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
Althalus Stenory Flying Blacksmiths 9	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:49:00 - [437] - Quote gascanu wrote: Althalus Stenory wrote: The more is announced, the more I think this summer will sux... to be honest the number of changes looks insane, and based on previous experience i'm pretty sure something will go wrong; last time when CCP tried something like this was when they introduced the new "improved" united inventory... and we all know how that went... it took them about what, 6 months to fix the things that where not broken but the new "improved" version broke; really, looking at the summer expansion... crossed fingers X Well the difference between Unified Inventory and this patch, is that the latter will have many economic impacts... :/ (and the worst to say is that we all know we'll have to wait patch day + x month to get something "fixed") I really like almost all updates from the start, but this devpost and the price devblog just throw everything in the water.
Bad Bobby Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust 404	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:59:00 - [438] - Quote It looks like a good plan to me. I'm sure time will tell, either way!
JanSVK Benzene Inc. The Explicit Alliance 2	Posted - 2014.04.30 07:59:00 - [439] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! 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. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Hello CCP Fozzie I don't agree with these changes and with the argument provided. If anything the ice belts should get a buff because ... * Stimulate the isotope... - The science and industry changes highly motivates people to use more POSs and JF so an increase in demad should be expected not a decline. Buf to Reprocessing Array = more POS. Also due to the reprocessing changes it is to be expected that mining will change so that Ore mined in hi-sec will be: 1, compressed (POS = isotope consumtion) 2, hauled to 0.0 (JF = isotope consumtion) 3, Refined 4, hauled to empire (JF = isotope consumtion) 5, sold, ect... To the slot changes... Building better Worlds Dev Blog wrote: So player corporations will now have the choice between the safety of NPC stations or the efficiency of Starbases to operate. The core goal is to motivate player entities to actually defend their Starbases if attacked or be reactive enough to take the blueprints out before they go into reinforced mode. So it is logical that POSs will be used more and will use large POS because The core goal is to motivate player entities to actually defend their Starbases. It is much easier to defend a large POS than a small one. There is no argument about that. Question If it turns out that your assumtions where wrong, can we expect CCP Fozzie wrote: adjust further if necessary once we see the results. bact to original values or even lowering of isotope consumtion?
Dracvlad Taishi Combine Second-Dawn 397	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:02:00 - [440] - Quote In this thread a Goon said the impact on his alliance is trival, for my group it is not trival. Thank you CCP for making it even more difficult as a small guy in the fringes of 0.0. The reason you did this was to try to take back some of the advantages you are giving to null sec coalitions in terms of industry, you realised that it would be too easy for them to flood hisec markets, and the only way you could try to stop that was transport costs. This does nothing for force projection apart from kick the small guys in the nuts even more. I operate a JF and the jump fuel for that is already a pain, but that makes it even more painful, so the next patch, my main way of getting minerals (gun mining) gets a 50% nerf, and then you add to the pain by making it even more difficult to bring in minerals from hisec. Now what about adding hidden mining sites in NPC 0.0 at least, so we have a slightly better chance of gathering minerals, apart from ninja Venture fleets... From all of this I am expecting you guys to nerf hauler spawns next, please at least leave them as they are in NPC 0.0. Don't be a turd and follow the herd Instead be a Hero at Hub Zero
Shiti Dama Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 10	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:19:00 - [441] - Quote My anticipation for the summer patch is up by 50%, desire to log in is down by 1/3.
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5053	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:45:00 - [442] - Quote Habris wrote: 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 Typical goon. Try putting forth a tiny bit of effort to read and you will have noticed isotopes are being reduced by 1/3 to offset the 50% increase in consumption. Effectively what you could bridge/jump before with your fuel bay will be identical after the patch. Habris wrote: p.s. remember those interceptor changes? yeah this is about a good idea as that. Reminder: it wasn't. Interceptors are really taking you nullbears for a ride lately. Maybe form a gang to deal with them when they are around? I kill them all the time with a hauler and here you are crying bloody murder how they are destroying your game. Wipe those tears little goon. Go tell papa mittens to reimburse your ratting Ishtar and to do something about those bad, bad interceptors. No seriously, stop crying. You are embarrassing null players. .
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1302	Posted - 2014.04.30 08:53:00 - [443] - Quote The biggest spoiled little brats in the game are crying like bitches, this just proves that the changes happening are way overdue. Thank you CCP and keep fixing EvE Online. The Tears Must Flow
Dave Stark 5205	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:10:00 - [444] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: The biggest spoiled little brats in the game are crying like bitches, this just proves that the changes happening are way overdue. Thank you CCP and keep fixing EvE Online. considering there has been a lot of talk about people switching to shield caps (so, mostly caldari ships) you might want to take a moment to consider that if the entity in the game who has literally just been handed a monopoly on capital fleet fuel prices says "this is bad" they might have a point. then again, they just might really hate being rich. shrug
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 694	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:15:00 - [445] - Quote Jena Jamson wrote: Don't you see all the negative responses here? WE DONT WANT IT! CCP LISTEN TO YOUR PLAYER BASE WHO ACTUALLY PLAYS THE GAME! Think back over the last few years.... When have CCP EVER listened to the player base...they may make a few cosmetic changes to give the impression that they listen, but in reality they really do not give a sh!t what we think. They have a fancy idea that some idiot dreamt up (probably while drunk, as no-one can come up with dopey ideas like this otherwise) and will bring it in regardless of what anyone says. I have long since given up providing feedback on the test forums, as it is completely pointless. I donGÇÖt even bother looking at it anymore as it is totally irrelevant. So, save your breath, they are going to do it anyway.
King Fu Hostile Imperial Collective Unsettled. 74	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:23:00 - [446] - Quote Rommiee wrote: So, save your breath, they are going to do it anyway. I'd do the same just to get to laugh for all these aspie tears, but they do it because it's good for the game. Local industry creates gameplay, and regional resource differences encourage territorial conflicts. Both reduce stagnation and enrichen the game.
Amely Miles Exiled Tech 10	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:25:00 - [447] - Quote i have started calling this "the Summer of Nerf" .... i am hoping what i imagine is about to come true ...the builing your own gates thing has me thinking of a Eve 2.0 universe next to this one allowing for server tidi to disperse between the two universes as well as power projecting, if i imagine this correctly the second universe would need to have us build gates on the other side as well to get back to this one so if this is true then it makes sense for CCP to be pushing people in to a self sufficent way of living and i agree ...if not then CCP fail big time.
Tragot Gomndor Krautz WH Exploration and Production Cerberus Unleashed 31	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:35:00 - [448] - Quote Hello :D you dont like that nerf? you live in 0.0? you still like isk? JOIN WORMHOLES TODAY -no cynos -no jumpdrives -no icebelts -no supers -(almost) no goons and therfore -(almost) no tidi ENLIST NOW TO THE LOCAL WORMHOLE CORP NEAR YOU 0.0 = GOONS = SAAAMMMMEEE!!!!1111222
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 188	Posted - 2014.04.30 09:36:00 - [449] - Quote This could be a smart way to catch botting from RMT Because of the increased consumption, extra demand will increase the price and attract botters to this market segment more. Once they are all in place in ice belts, CCP only needs to check the client and behavior of these accounts and BAN HAMMER TIME Eve rule no.1: The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
Johan March GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 113	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:05:00 - [450] - Quote I'm too much of a filthy casual to pretend to know how this change will effect every aspect of gameplay, but CCP usually does changes in the 10-20% range and then re-evaluates. A 50% change in fuel consumption just seems a bit much.
Nofearion sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Brothers of Tangra 67	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:17:00 - [451] - Quote It is natural for most to Fear change, to explore the unknown and be taken out of their comfort zone. Make no mistake change has been needed for quite some time in the indy game. This is but one piece of the puzzle and I believe CCP is doing their best to improve the game. From what CCP Fozzie has stated and from what is in the other threads this will be a good change overall. This step is intended to encourage local markets to flourish by building locally while at the same time putting a squeeze on large scale force projection. I applaud the effort, However I think you will see that the power blocs will simply start using ships that use the fuel type of the region they are holding, and will encourage botting of ice mining in null to feed the massive fleets. The other side of the coin is the small entrepreneurs like myself and many others posting in protest will see increased cost of transport quickly outstipping our profit margins, Can't do without goods will cause an imbalance in the market where it is relatively cheap in the space it is found in. Namely products made from the racial goo's. Do the the cost of import and scarcity these items will command a very high price. where they cannot be found. I know that sounds good right? however the power blocs have their logistic chains set up and cover so much space that members of those power blocs will see little of any change. Those of us who are not operating within those circles will be cut out. help us remain competitive, in addition of the 2/3ds reduction in the size of Isotopes, increase Jump freighter fuel bays by 40%. while it will not reduce the cost it will increase our range and or allow us to get the best price for needed fuel to where we do not pay a premium do to limited availability in the areas we travel.
Night9 Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:26:00 - [452] - Quote loving the tears. rus for life ))
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 388	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:33:00 - [453] - Quote Good change. Big bloobs are already unhappy - as this will increase cost of defending moons on edge of their space. Can we get also pos jumb bridge fuel cost increase and smaller Jump Bridge range? Isthar Changes LVL 5 Missions in Nullspace
Anita Too Ayonae Enterprises 5	Posted - 2014.04.30 10:58:00 - [454] - Quote I am neither an opponent nor a proponent to this change. However, an industry buff should not be raising the price of everything thus forcing people to do industry (or making people who already does industry happy for a short time). Rather, CCP should look into making industry (or mining ice in this aspect) more interesting. As I remember, there was talks of having surprises of finding moon-goo during mining. What happened to that suggestion? What about creating a mini-game at the end of each asteroid's life (when it was about to pop) where upon successful completion will give some valuable moon-goo/minerals or even modules and ships (well the roids can form around modules/ships if lore if what we're worried about)? Engaging our mind in a mini-game and being rewarded with some "surprise" is what creates excitement. Hope this helps.
Marius8 DNS Requiem Brothers of Tangra 5	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:00:00 - [455] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Can we get also pos jumb bridge fuel cost increase and smaller Jump Bridge range? please don't give them more BAD ideas!
Bill Andrex SiN Corp The Unthinkables 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:02:00 - [456] - Quote Increase isotopes are you mad? So let's kill off industry for the average guy or small alliance in one foul swoop so the large entities are are to absorb these costs from moon goo and rental agreements. Bad enough with the refining changes coming in as well, manufacturing and logistics in 0.0 will suffer, this is a double edged sword with increased hauling with ore compression AND increased costs in logistics. If it ain't broke don't fix it, CCP please stop screwing your customers....
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1302	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:10:00 - [457] - Quote Bill Andrex wrote: Increase isotopes are you mad? So let's kill off industry for the average guy or small alliance in one foul swoop so the large entities are are to absorb these costs from moon goo and rental agreements. Bad enough with the refining changes coming in as well, manufacturing and logistics in 0.0 will suffer, this is a double edged sword with increased hauling with ore compression AND increased costs in logistics. If it ain't broke don't fix it, CCP please stop screwing your customers.... Use normal freighters. JF shouldn't even be in the game. The Tears Must Flow
King Fu Hostile Imperial Collective Unsettled. 74	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:12:00 - [458] - Quote CCP: we want to encourage local production by buffing refining and production outside high population areas and nerfing JFs Nulltards: bloobloo alkjdsalksjdlaksj butbutbut JFs will cost more
gascanu Bearing Srl. 107	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:13:00 - [459] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Good change. Big bloobs are already unhappy - as this will increase cost of defending moons on edge of their space. Can we get also pos jumb bridge fuel cost increase and smaller Jump Bridge range? ice miner spotted!
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 694	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:21:00 - [460] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Use normal freighters. JF shouldn't even be in the game. They already are. If you don't know how or why do some research before making idiotic comments.
Green Gambit Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 50	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:24:00 - [461] - Quote Needmore Longcat wrote: In all seriousness, not trolling or trying to be nasty at all. Why can we not work on the things that have been broken for literally 10 years, before we start changing mechanisms that work at least somewhat well at the moment? POS comes to mind, for one... Because whilst getting a game designer/balancer to work on POS code would be very entertaining - I don't think it would come out of the process much better than it is now.
gascanu Bearing Srl. 107	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:35:00 - [462] - Quote isotopes are basically " the gasoline" of eve online; this change will drive the prices up; and, like in real life, (yea, i know, but it's about economy here) when the gasoline prices goes up, who will get affected really bad? the medium/low classes; the rich don' t really care and the oil producers ...
sci0gon Kaira Innovations Superior Eve Engineering 23	Posted - 2014.04.30 11:49:00 - [463] - Quote I cant help but think that you guys made this change rashly. firstly industry changes are going to force people to use pos's more due to the pricing scheme of station use and with the lack of standings required to put up a pos it really doesn't take much to do it. now we have the must nerf cap's fuel just for the sake of it, so whats next? are you going to nerf fuel blocks to the point that they build with the same requirements but only produce half the fuel? both of these changes and projection of player pos use in empire will have a price hike on ice mining as already discussed while will cause many to flock to it not just those who mine to sell but also those who mine to fuel their own pos's
Black Canary Jnr Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance 104	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:01:00 - [464] - Quote The other angle to this is that it combats cap proliferation by pricing out poorer players and making caps a more substantial investment. Before you go on about how it's your right to have a cap lets look at the situation. Serious sov battles in 0.0 (Notice: SOV) have become about who has the most caps and supers to the point where subcaps are irrelevant, except for HICS and DICs, and prehaps a few support ships. The Slowcat carrier doctrine, even post drone assist, is still a monumental force. It can take on subcap forces many times larger than it's own to the point where sub-caps are almost ineffective, the only counter is other capitals and supers. A newbie in a rifter was once a force to be reckoned with, now he's a none factor in a sov battle. What we are approaching is the end game, where it's all about caps. It used to be Hellcats, drakes, alpha fleets, thundercats and other doctrines, were you could 'counter' an enemy fleet with a different concept, be it sig tanking, sniping, out tanking, alpha. All that is now becoming more irrelevant in serious Sov 0.0 battles and the arms race is getting more advanced in other fights, we are seeing T3s become the main subcap fleet doctrines for all 0.0 powers. The end game of eve gets nearer everyday as we continue our trudge towards inevitable cap ownership. The next big war we will see (likely N3/ PL v. Goons + pets) is going to highlight this fact more than ever before as fights depend on breaking the ever increasing, easily replaceable, caps being fielded. Whilst this change to fuel consumption will have negative impacts there is no way around it, caps must be neutered, the consequences of inaction is a nerf to the PvP that makes EVE so great and enjoyable. Does increasing Jump costs neuter them? Yes, i'd say it goes a way towards it, but it doesn't do enough. Caps and supers should be expensive, it's a frickin' capital ship with 1000's of crew members with the best mobility, defence and offence in the game (not including JFs and Rorqs of course). That comes at a price and the price just went up. Yes, prices will go up this patch, the formulas are changing, it's going to be more expensive for T2, but that's going to affect everyone equally, i can live with that, i can live with inflation and getting less bang for my buck. I have no sympathy for the people who want to jump stuff 2 times to sell it in hi-sec, it's a buff and a niche for shallow 0.0 with it's poor ratting. Deep 0.0 gets officer spawns and AFK ratting, we get to do cheaper indy. Don't like it? Get your renter overlords to get you a new system closer to hi-sec. This patch is going to open up lots of opportunity's if people can just see past the 'i pay more/ i get nerfed' view. Can't have it your way all the time.
Jenn aSide STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries 6295	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:17:00 - [465] - 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 That sounds like entitlement to me. If things get too expensive, cut back. I am going from 4 accounts to 3 because while isk isn't hard to make, 3 billion isk per month for plex is a bit high as overhead, so to be more comfortable I'm letting go of a mostly cyno account. CCP never promised that plex would stay low. and no one ever promised you that you'd always be able to just plex accounts forever. Likewise, our alliances should adapt to this change (even exploit it) and keep on trucking. As much as I'd hate to pay more at the pump, the truth is that fuel has probably been way too cheap for a long time.
Jenn aSide STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries 6295	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:19:00 - [466] - Quote Black Canary Jnr wrote: The other angle to this is that it combats cap proliferation by pricing out poorer players and making caps a more substantial investment. Before you go on about how it's your right to have a cap lets look at the situation. Serious sov battles in 0.0 (Notice: SOV) have become about who has the most caps and supers to the point where subcaps are irrelevant, except for HICS and DICs, and prehaps a few support ships. The Slowcat carrier doctrine, even post drone assist, is still a monumental force. It can take on subcap forces many times larger than it's own to the point where sub-caps are almost ineffective, the only counter is other capitals and supers. A newbie in a rifter was once a force to be reckoned with, now he's a none factor in a sov battle. What we are approaching is the end game, where it's all about caps. It used to be Hellcats, drakes, alpha fleets, thundercats and other doctrines, were you could 'counter' an enemy fleet with a different concept, be it sig tanking, sniping, out tanking, alpha. All that is now becoming more irrelevant in serious Sov 0.0 battles and the arms race is getting more advanced in other fights, we are seeing T3s become the main subcap fleet doctrines for all 0.0 powers. The end game of eve gets nearer everyday as we continue our trudge towards inevitable cap ownership. The next big war we will see (likely N3/ PL v. Goons + pets) is going to highlight this fact more than ever before as fights depend on breaking the ever increasing, easily replaceable, caps being fielded. Whilst this change to fuel consumption will have negative impacts there is no way around it, caps must be neutered, the consequences of inaction is a nerf to the PvP that makes EVE so great and enjoyable. Does increasing Jump costs neuter them? Yes, i'd say it goes a way towards it, but it doesn't do enough. Caps and supers should be expensive, it's a frickin' capital ship with 1000's of crew members with the best mobility, defence and offence in the game (not including JFs and Rorqs of course). That comes at a price and the price just went up. Yes, prices will go up this patch, the formulas are changing, it's going to be more expensive for T2, but that's going to affect everyone equally, i can live with that, i can live with inflation and getting less bang for my buck. I have no sympathy for the people who want to jump stuff 2 times to sell it in hi-sec, it's a buff and a niche for shallow 0.0 with it's poor ratting. Deep 0.0 gets officer spawns and AFK ratting, we get to do cheaper indy. Don't like it? Get your renter overlords to get you a new system closer to hi-sec. This patch is going to open up lots of opportunity's if people can just see past the 'i pay more/ i get nerfed' view. Can't have it your way all the time. Well said. No one likes a nerf but CCP is balancing a video game and when something is too cheap or easy, it should probably be adjusted.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3403	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:29:00 - [467] - Quote In addition to the proposed changes, why not also disallow isotope storage in fleet hangars? This would have a minimal impact on black ops, dreadnoughts and jump freighters but seriously curtail carriers, supercarriers and titans. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Saab Kado DEAD JESTERS The Harlequin's 19	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:29:00 - [468] - Quote Someone just finished training Brain Damage V, Can we have a real expansion instead of a TL;DR we want you to buy PLEX by making all sh**ts ingame ++ber expensive ?
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact 26	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:46:00 - [469] - Quote Apollo Purvon wrote: You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem. This. Attempting to fix a non-existent problem. If anything needs fixing it is ease of power projection for alliances with limitless isk renting out half of nullsec. But until you can think of a way of fixing that without making logistics even more of a nightmare than it already is or nerfing BlackOps, then just leave it alone. If you need something useful to do you could start with fixing the bloody overview so that it remembers each tab's sort order, and giving us a keyboard shortcut for 'orbit at current'.
Ream Lolstar WALLTREIPERS The Initiative. 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:52:00 - [470] - Quote Really nice change fozzie, if you want to move around eve with your capitals you have to pay for it
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1305	Posted - 2014.04.30 12:56:00 - [471] - Quote Also make capital ships have an daily upkeep cost (like magic the gathering cards). The Tears Must Flow
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 25	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:05:00 - [472] - Quote what ccp is trying to do is obvious since as we all know the gms are nothing else than goon members and as we all know goons is always against industry in the first place this change does not suprise me at all in short CCP IS ***** THE SMALL CORPS UP AGAIN in favor of the big massive alliances so ** YOU CCP
Raketefrau Di-Tron Heavy Industries Fatal Ascension 34	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:31:00 - [473] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. Eve Summer 2014: Screwing Every Orifice Pretty much every single devblog I've seen so far about this expansion has been a kick in the nuts. More complexity, more cost, more work, more effort in a game that already feels like an extra job. Gonna be nice to get that $30/month back in the budget.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 390	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:32:00 - [474] - Quote How to block good change? Ask/Force your renter hordes to post a negative comment : http://eveskunk.com/e/338387548 Maybe it is time to reduce rent for those who posted here , like in CSM elections for proper voting. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
Beryl Invictus State War Academy Caldari State 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:34:00 - [475] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: How to block good change? Ask/Force your renter hordes to post a negative comment : http://eveskunk.com/e/338387548 Maybe it is time to reduce rent for those who posted here , like in CSM elections for proper voting. ha! That's amazing... and probably every major alliance is doing this as well. Classic.
Demotress The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 20	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:35:00 - [476] - Quote dont forget this is gonna affect prices of null and low sec commodities. meaning anything you can only find in null or low will go up rather sharply in price because the cost to move it is going to go up sharply. therefore itll end up increasing anything that needs for example moon goo to be built. be ready for a mass inflation of prices.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 391	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:45:00 - [477] - Quote This is move in the right direction. Now big bloobs just drop countless capital fleets on each possible timer. After this change price of defending r64 moon that is to far from a staging location will be so big that moving your ships to defend this tower will be equal to a month or two month income from this pos. So big powers will have to decide let go on this moon , or spend 2-3b just to defend this one timer. From my perspective titan bridge cost need to be also escalated. We are not talking only about 50% increase in fuel consumption , but about 75% shift in the isotopes price at the same time. People will put a lot of towers in the higsec that also need those isotopes. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1305	Posted - 2014.04.30 13:45:00 - [478] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: How to block good change? Ask/Force your renter hordes to post a negative comment : http://eveskunk.com/e/338387548 Maybe it is time to reduce rent for those who posted here , like in CSM elections for proper voting. This is beautiful. The Tears Must Flow
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 391	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:05:00 - [479] - Quote This is the real reason why. Bloobs are using Archon fleets. Lets assume that r64 moon is owned right now by a bloob. Let it be close, very close to staging point , only 1 midpoint , around 30 LY so all carriers at lvl V calibration can jump. Currently amarr isotopes is expensive , but it will be more so lets assume 1.5k per isotope. Lets think about smaller fleet just 100 archons that have to make this trip. This will give us 20,500 isotopes in only one way after this change - so this will be around 4.100.000 isotopes for this whole fleet to be moved in both directions. Simple math : 4.100.000 * 1.500 = 6.150.000.000 per trip to save one r64 tower. This is way more than this tower will earn you in month , and locals can ref it again day after. This is what all big blobs are terrified that all their income will be consumed by fuel costs. If this change will be connected to direct pos jump bridge changes , and increase in cost of titan bridges then all smaller alliances , lowsec people will be able to take poses that are in area where they are living. Big coalitions will have rethink what is realy worth to defend - when they spend 8bil a month to defend pos that will give them 2-3bil of income per month. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
El Geo Pathfinders. Veni Vidi Vici Alliance 200	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:07:00 - [480] - Quote I'm neither part of a large coalition or alliance nor do I wish to be but one thing I do use is my archon for hopping around NPC k-space as a type of mobile office for myself and sometimes members of my small corp, i've also recently taken to bridging them around by use of blops to make things easier. Now, I'm definately not a fan of large alliances (like a lot of you posting are in) and I can afford the costs (although extremely grudgingly but I like my semi nomadic gamestyle, and the my carrier enables me to do that where Blops bridging allows me to move my corpmates (without jump capable ships) around as well) but I can not see the sense in these particular changes, so far everything i've been reading in the upcoming patch seems to point to an increase in overal pricing accross the board. Am I to assume that these changes are meant to somehow benefit me or my small corp in some way and how exactly will they do it? path-+find-+er (pthfndr, p+ñth-)n. 1. One that discovers a new course or way, especially through or into unexplored regions. http://www.youtube.com/user/EvEPathfinders/videos?view=0
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 697	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:11:00 - [481] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: This is the real reason why. Bloobs are using Archon fleets. Lets assume that r64 moon is owned right now by a bloob. Let it be close, very close to staging point , only 1 midpoint , around 30 LY so all carriers at lvl V calibration can jump. Currently amarr isotopes is expensive , but it will be more so lets assume 1.5k per isotope. Lets think about smaller fleet just 100 archons that have to make this trip. This will give us 20,500 isotopes in only one way after this change - so this will be around 4.100.000 isotopes for this whole fleet to be moved in both directions. Simple math : 4.100.000 * 1.500 = 6.150.000.000 per trip to save one r64 tower. This is way more than this tower will earn you in month , and locals can ref it again day after. This is what all big blobs are terrified that all their income will be consumed by fuel costs. If this change will be connected to direct pos jump bridge changes , and increase in cost of titan bridges then all smaller alliances , lowsec people will be able to take poses that are in area where they are living. Big coalitions will have rethink what is realy worth to defend - when they spend 8bil a month to defend pos that will give them 2-3bil of income per month. LOL, you really have no idea, do you ?
gascanu Bearing Srl. 109	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:33:00 - [482] - Quote Rommiee wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: This is the real reason why. Bloobs are using Archon fleets. Lets assume that r64 moon is owned right now by a bloob. Let it be close, very close to staging point , only 1 midpoint , around 30 LY so all carriers at lvl V calibration can jump. Currently amarr isotopes is expensive , but it will be more so lets assume 1.5k per isotope. Lets think about smaller fleet just 100 archons that have to make this trip. This will give us 20,500 isotopes in only one way after this change - so this will be around 4.100.000 isotopes for this whole fleet to be moved in both directions. Simple math : 4.100.000 * 1.500 = 6.150.000.000 per trip to save one r64 tower. This is way more than this tower will earn you in month , and locals can ref it again day after. This is what all big blobs are terrified that all their income will be consumed by fuel costs. If this change will be connected to direct pos jump bridge changes , and increase in cost of titan bridges then all smaller alliances , lowsec people will be able to take poses that are in area where they are living. Big coalitions will have rethink what is realy worth to defend - when they spend 8bil a month to defend pos that will give them 2-3bil of income per month. LOL, you really have no idea, do you ? no, he's just upset that someone took his moon
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 25	Posted - 2014.04.30 14:40:00 - [483] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: How to block good change? Ask/Force your renter hordes to post a negative comment : http://eveskunk.com/e/338387548 Maybe it is time to reduce rent for those who posted here , like in CSM elections for proper voting. i didnt post because they sendet that mail out i post because the arseholes of ccp keep ***** up the fun in the game of the nulsec indies what will happen now is that the prices dont go up a little but massivle that means that the smaller corps can no longer maintain theyr few posses / capitals thank you ccp *****
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 392	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:20:00 - [484] - Quote I dont have or want to have a pos. Yes smaller aliances also will be affected , but i proposed a bit ealier that ronquals and JF should be excluded from this change. At the same time i suggested that supercapitals should burn way more than 50% MORE fuel. Normal player don't deploy 60LY away every day to save something - big bloobs have to. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
Zoldarion Katelo Void.Tech Get Off My Lawn 18	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:36:00 - [485] - Quote I dont really get this change at all. It really just seems like a 'stick it to the little guy' change. 0.0 items will all go up in price, that is a given. With regards force projection of the large alliances i think line members will see 0 change, the higher ups will change whatever sums they need to to cover the increased cost and alliances will still provide fuel for cap operations. The smaller alliances' pilots that do no provide fuel for their cap pilots will feel a real pinch as less pilots will report for duty.
Axe Coldon Coldon Enterprises Axion Bionics 25	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:38:00 - [486] - Quote Antoine Jordan wrote: Are you doing anything for carriers, who often carry a large part of their fuel in their corporate hangar, or is it intended that they won't be able to go as far without refueling after this change? Way I read it the volume of the isotopes gets smaller. so you will be able to hold more in your various cargo holds.
Alyssa Haginen State War Academy Caldari State 17	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:42:00 - [487] - Quote What it means is every jump drive ship will lose 16% fuel capacity. If your total range is 10ly right now it will be 8.4ly after the update. This is just dumb because ccp has and keeps downgrading income in all forms in the game too. When a player feels they would need to invest more time and money then they have available they are less likely to keep playing.
ctrlc ctrlv Republic University Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 15:43:00 - [488] - Quote All the mechanics to boost and help large power blocks on the game.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 475	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:00:00 - [489] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: How to block good change? Ask/Force your renter hordes to post a negative comment : http://eveskunk.com/e/338387548 Maybe it is time to reduce rent for those who posted here , like in CSM elections for proper voting. Nice astroturfing. Can't blame 'em for trying, though. Fortunately, there so far does not appear to be an intelligent, non-kneejerk poster among them. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 475	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:02:00 - [490] - Quote Katanagari wrote: Querns wrote: 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. People who mine topes won't benefit at all. There are two reasons for this: 1) The reduction in isotopes usage from towers will be offset by the increase in usage for jump fuel. That's the stated objective. So there will likely be no net increase in isotope demands or a sustained increase in isotope prices. There will be some movement in racial demands as caldari research towers are removed and archon jump costs increase. That is all. You are aware that not everyone mines ice in nullsec, right? Highsec ice miners unequivocally win here. Also, I don't have the math in front of me, but I'm pretty sure a JF does not need to consume a number of topes equal to the size of its cargohold to move topes to market. I am pretty confident that you still win, despite the increase in transportation costs. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 475	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:04:00 - [491] - Quote forum ate my reply :saddowns: Rena Senn wrote: Querns wrote: I'll give all you people a hint: you are not arguing particularly well towards getting the changes reversed. Here is a list of things you probably don't want to include in your argument: "small alliances" plex the subscription status of your account or imminent cancellation thereof the "sandbox" a litany of other, completely unrelated concerns that simply must be solved before the sacred cow can be touched Use of these terms cheapens your argument considerably. If you need a refresher course on how to argue for or against a change properly, feel free to peruse my posting history. I've got a pretty good track record when it comes to feedback successfully affecting the game. How well would this argument have gone down if it was posted during the summer of rage? You don't think these factors are relevant? Fine. That's for you to prove. Trying to blatantly shape the narrative by insisting anyone who disagrees with you is an idiot for even raising such concerns is only going to entrench opinions against you further. But then again maybe that's exactly what you want. This "us versus the pubbies" song and dance always plays well with the home crowd, regardless of the actual validity of other people's concerns. The thing here is that you're not trying to convince me. You're trying to convince CCP. The factors I'm describing give your argument a whiny, entitled, kneejerk candor, and increase the risk that anyone reading it who can actually affect change writes off your comment as whiny, entitled, kneejerk filth. To more reliably affect change, you have to contain your emotion and suggest alterations to the proposal without using threats or hyperbole. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9838	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:07:00 - [492] - Quote 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. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Nofearion sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Brothers of Tangra 68	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:14:00 - [493] - 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. this is much appreciated. and it is a lot of information to scan through Hopefully you will consider expanding Jump Freighter fuel bays by 40% Thanks you for your efforts
Demotress The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 20	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:18:00 - [494] - Quote if you are going to do this why not also have a new skill to reduce fuel consumption like advanced jump fuel conservation and have do like 5% per level so you don't hit the market hard because too much too quick will shock the market.
Tam Althor lll tempered sea bass Brothers of Tangra 27	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:19:00 - [495] - 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. Can we at least get an answer to why you think there would be a drop in people using towers and needing less fuel after the summer expansion?
Petrus Blackshell Derelict Rifter Enterprise 3107	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:22:00 - [496] - Quote CCP WHY ARE YOU NERFING MY SUPER SAFE AND EASY AND CHEAP TELEPORTATION OMG GRR GOONZ Seriously? This is a great change, and I wish they didn't reduce the volume of isotopes, either. Transportation of stuff is the biggest imbalance of risk/reward/price in Eve, almost solely attributable to the ridiculous prevalence of jump drive and jump bridge mechanics. I understand it can't be removed (yet, anyway) or some places would turn into wastelands, but really there should be more effort, risk, or money involved in transporting large amount of stuff than clicking a cyno button, then a jump button, for the price of a couple tens of millions of ISK. All the "but my small alliance " talk is crock, too. Grow a real logistics wing. I own/fly a JF, and I have run a small corp/alliance. PLEASE NERF ME, CCP. For the good of the game. Rifterlings - newbie-friendly swashbuckling corp ("weflyrifters" in-game channel). Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Gabriel Z Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 30	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:25:00 - [497] - Quote I just learned about Malcanis' Law. It is totally appropriate for this issue and the issues related to to it. I'm reposting it for those who, like me, hadn't heard of it before. Malcanis' Law "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of GÇÿnew playersGÇÖ, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players." Though I propose a slight update: "Whenever a mechanics change is proposed, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."
Z air The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 1	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:39:00 - [498] - Quote Alternative Suggestion to adjusting the STAT's of everything. What if, instead of Adjusting this, and that, to make it all work, why not just make a blue print for Jump Fuel. This is going to be an Industrial Expansion after all. If you put into play, a Jump Drive Fuel Block, much like Fuel Blocks for POS's You can then tweak the amount of materials required to make each fuel block, as opposed to trying to change the stats on the ships each time you need to tweak something. Heck, you could even go as far as to having Ship Type fuel in addition to Racial Type, and thus introduce some new element to the gameplay For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) This could then allow an interesting dynamic to form, could limit the use of your opponents fleets and what they field. Additionally, it allows you to tweak the material requirements for each type of capital , without affecting all the others with one brush. As an extra element, you could make cross racial fuel bpo's that allow you to use isotopes from another racial fuel type, to produce the same type of fuel block, but at much greater material cost. Much like how Alchemy is for the Moon Goo
Resgo Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 41	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:43:00 - [499] - Quote Fozzie, If the goal of this is really to stimulate more sales of topes, why not decrease the volume of the isotopes by 50 percent rather than 33 percent and make a similar change to the volume of fuel blocks. I can guarantee that if you do that POSes will want to go to max fuel increasing the number of days between refueling and capitals will all be trying to keep a full fuel tank. The POS consumption rate would stay the same but there would be a sales bump for each new POS setup and each new cap sold. I suspect those fueling large POS farms would really appreciate having to do it less often.
Demotress The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 20	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:51:00 - [500] - Quote Z air wrote: Alternative Suggestion to adjusting the STAT's of everything. What if, instead of Adjusting this, and that, to make it all work, why not just make a blue print for Jump Fuel. This is going to be an Industrial Expansion after all. If you put into play, a Jump Drive Fuel Block, much like Fuel Blocks for POS's You can then tweak the amount of materials required to make each fuel block, as opposed to trying to change the stats on the ships each time you need to tweak something. Heck, you could even go as far as to having Ship Type fuel in addition to Racial Type, and thus introduce some new element to the gameplay For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) This could then allow an interesting dynamic to form, could limit the use of your opponents fleets and what they field. Additionally, it allows you to tweak the material requirements for each type of capital , without affecting all the others with one brush. As an extra element, you could make cross racial fuel bpo's that allow you to use isotopes from another racial fuel type, to produce the same type of fuel block, but at much greater material cost. Much like how Alchemy is for the Moon Goo with that for an idea you could have it require something like moon goo or a certain gas for super/titan fuel.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1305	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:51:00 - [501] - 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. Thank you for the update. Keep doing a good job. The Tears Must Flow
Z air The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 1	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:51:00 - [502] - Quote Just to add an extra idea to the fray, For things like the Super Fuel Blocks, the materials list, could require things only available in null sec, Ie Morphite Additives Make Morphite Relevant again
Hopelesshobo Red Dwarf Mining Corporation space weaponry and trade 212	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:55:00 - [503] - Quote Z air wrote: For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) The reason why fuel blocks were introduced were to make life easier....not harder like you are trying to suggest. You are taking currently 4 versions of fuel, and creating 13. Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 476	Posted - 2014.04.30 16:59:00 - [504] - Quote Hopelesshobo wrote: Z air wrote: For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) The reason why fuel blocks were introduced were to make life easier....not harder like you are trying to suggest. You are taking currently 4 versions of fuel, and creating 13. This is correct. POS Fuel blocks make sense because the old way of fueling POS required you to balance several different types of materiel. Adding an intermediate step simplified matters. You can't simplify jump fuel any more than it is; it is only one item. Parting it out into 13 different parts adds nothing. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Z air The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 1	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:00:00 - [505] - Quote Hopelesshobo wrote: Z air wrote: For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) The reason why fuel blocks were introduced were to make life easier....not harder like you are trying to suggest. You are taking currently 4 versions of fuel, and creating 13. Yes, you are correct, those fuel blocks made operating pos's a lot less daunting, and we all benefited. But im tired of seeing stuff nerfed and changed, by simply changing the stats of things Why not change the dynamic, by adding something to the game, an extra element Allows ccp to focus on force projection, without nerfing other parts in the process. Unbinds them from hitting super projection hard for example, and let Jump Freighters do their good work. without suffering the Super Nerf Penalty
Colklari The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:04:00 - [506] - Quote Z air wrote: Alternative Suggestion to adjusting the STAT's of everything. What if, instead of Adjusting this, and that, to make it all work, why not just make a blue print for Jump Fuel. This is going to be an Industrial Expansion after all. If you put into play, a Jump Drive Fuel Block, much like Fuel Blocks for POS's You can then tweak the amount of materials required to make each fuel block, as opposed to trying to change the stats on the ships each time you need to tweak something. Heck, you could even go as far as to having Ship Type fuel in addition to Racial Type, and thus introduce some new element to the gameplay For example Sub Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Fuel Block tweaked for use in Black ops Ships) Normal Cap Jump Fuel (Each racial Jump Fuel Block for Regular Capitals) Industrial Cap Jump Fuel (For the likes of Jump Frieghters and Rorquals) Super Cap Jump Fuel (Each Racial Jump Fuel Block) This could then allow an interesting dynamic to form, could limit the use of your opponents fleets and what they field. Additionally, it allows you to tweak the material requirements for each type of capital , without affecting all the others with one brush. As an extra element, you could make cross racial fuel bpo's that allow you to use isotopes from another racial fuel type, to produce the same type of fuel block, but at much greater material cost. Much like how Alchemy is for the Moon Goo Perhaps it can work like this: Jump Freighter/Rorqual: Industrial Fuel made of Racial Ice Products and underutilized common Gas products Carrier/Dreadnaught/SuperCarrier: Tactical Fuel made of Racial Ice products and underutilized uncommon Gas Products Titan/BlackOps: Strategic Fuel made of Racial Ice products, Underutilized uncommon Gas products, and underutilized PI products (Wishlist item: incorporate biomass into this type) Industrial fuel is the most basic, and is used for both jumping and fueling rorqual Industrial core (one fuel bay, woot!) Tactical Fuel is simple to make, but can only be used for Jump Drives. Strategic Fuel can be used for both Jump Drives and Jump Bridging (One fuel bay woot!) Modifications to material requirements for the fuel blocks can be made without affecting ship stats.
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 26	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:08:00 - [507] - 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. ive said something similar when the medium size long range weapons got nerved GO DO SOMETHING USEFULL YOU LAZY BUNCH OF SLACKERS so many annoying bugs some are known for years fix hose before planting more of these ***** changes in the game most ppl the ppl dont ask for why are the posses still bugged as hell why cant mobile labs be set public ( the option is there it only does not work ) why do after 1 of the next big patches labs have to be out of the pos is only a freaking bullseye ANDS WHO THE EXCEPT CCP WANTS THE COST OF ICE PRODUCTS TO GO UP go do soemthing usefull and start bug hunting stop implanting things in the game till the game is ***** bug free enough that what is in the game actualy works
Suzuka A1 Multiplex Gaming Li3 Federation 15	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:10:00 - [508] - Quote The forum f***ed up my comment, I am re-typing everything. aka placeholder. 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
Z air The Circus Corp Intrepid Crossing 1	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:12:00 - [509] - Quote Whilst we have the focus on Fuel For Jump Drives, and Industry as this summer's patch What about instead, make an alchemy type reaction, that very ineffeciently turns one isotope into another, with the addition of null sec materials like morphite.
addelee Hellfire Cult The East India Co. 85	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:14:00 - [510] - Quote Seems odd that there's been mention of "Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec." CCP deliberately create bottlenecks on manufacturing and ice anyway by always missing one vital build resource (or ice) per region. To seriously manufacture in null, you need to come to highsec. And now this change will raise the cost and very little benefit. It's meant to be a PvP game and if the cost of going to war increases (which this change will effect) wars will be smaller and less frequent. I just don't really understand why this change is even needed...
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 26	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:19:00 - [511] - Quote addelee wrote: Seems odd that there's been mention of "Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec." CCP deliberately create bottlenecks on manufacturing and ice anyway by always missing one vital build resource (or ice) per region. To seriously manufacture in null, you need to come to highsec. And now this change will raise the cost and very little benefit. It's meant to be a PvP game and if the cost of going to war increases (which this change will effect) wars will be smaller and less frequent. I just don't really understand why this change is even needed... its needet for ccp cause there aswell lazy and they want the normal joe not to be able to build stuff wich is obvious since most gm's are goons = anty indie
Saint Hecate Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn 7	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:21:00 - [512] - Quote I really worry about how much of an impact this is going to have on nullsec markets. It can be a nightmare having a decently seeded market out in null unless your apart of a large alliance. Even in LAWN our market isnt the greatest and we are a CFC alliance. I kind of hope this change doesnt go through just for the little guys. Im lucky to have built up the infrastructure to be able to survive/make isk in null and generally get what I need done but for newer pilots/alliances this may add an even higher hurdle they need to hop to even survive in null. I remember first starting out years ago where high market prices and having a hard time generating isk made Null very very difficult to function in as a newer pilot. Back in the days when Drake fleet was still super popular :P Hopefully this is written well enough to get my point across haha Thanks for your time Fozzie Best wishes Saint
Suzuka A1 Multiplex Gaming Li3 Federation 15	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:24:00 - [513] - Quote Rittel wrote: ...for the love of a things holy will you stop making the most boring parts of the game longer, more tedious and harder to do. CCP Seagull once said: Quote: There are some people who make things work - they pre-fit ships for a fleet op, they run mega-spreadsheets for the industry production lines needed to equip the war effort, build tools to manage a corporation or command large fleets. Their activities enable others to have fun in EVE. ... Whether in null, low or high sec, the dreams and ambitions of these people inspire others with purpose. We will start working to give the GÇ¥EnablersGÇ¥ better tools...We believe that helping these archetypes achieve their own goals is the best way to have the sandbox of EVE thrive - by supporting them in creating their own exciting plans and schemes. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-online-development-in-2013-and-beyond/ I believe these changes directly effect the current "tools" of Enablers (JFs) in a negative way, which of course means it goes directly against CCP Seagull's stated intentions for the game (and goes directly against what CCP is trying to do with this entire summer expansion). For those who provide JF services to their Corps/Alliances this will only hurt their fellow 'line members' and even those supplying doctrine fit ships will have to raise their prices which again hurts the 'line member' (whether or not the Corp/Alliance has some form of SRP because the SRP is never going to take shipping into account). Please rethink what you are trying to accomplish. 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
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 310	Posted - 2014.04.30 17:56:00 - [514] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: CCP WHY ARE YOU NERFING MY SUPER SAFE AND EASY AND CHEAP TELEPORTATION OMG GRR GOONZ How about the super safe gates in hisec? I say it's time for a gate tax. One isk per ton. Suzuka A1 wrote: CCP Seagull once said: Quote: There are some people who make things work - they pre-fit ships for a fleet op, they run mega-spreadsheets for the industry production lines needed to equip the war effort, build tools to manage a corporation or command large fleets. Their activities enable others to have fun in EVE. ... Whether in null, low or high sec, the dreams and ambitions of these people inspire others with purpose. We will start working to give the GÇ¥EnablersGÇ¥ better tools...We believe that helping these archetypes achieve their own goals is the best way to have the sandbox of EVE thrive - by supporting them in creating their own exciting plans and schemes. For what it's worth, Seagull also said "we kind of have a history of treating these people like...****"
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3406	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:30:00 - [515] - Quote If this is really about curtailing power projection, then this should be aimed solely at dreadnoughts, carriers, supercarriers, titans, jump bridges and jump portals. In addition, these vessels should not be able to store isotopes in fleet hangars - which means carriers and supercarriers will be hit the hardest by having their effective operating range seriously curtailed. Black ops and jump freighters should receive a pass - essentially enhancing their range. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1305	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:36:00 - [516] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: If this is really about curtailing power projection, then this should be aimed solely at dreadnoughts, carriers, supercarriers, titans, jump bridges and jump portals. In addition, these vessels should not be able to store isotopes in fleet hangars - which means carriers and supercarriers will be hit the hardest by having their effective operating range seriously curtailed. Black ops and jump freighters should receive a pass - essentially enhancing their range. Jump freighters should be removed from the game. The Tears Must Flow
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5054	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:45:00 - [517] - Quote Null players still pretending they care about independent small groups in this thread? .
Weaselior GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 7197	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:50:00 - [518] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Null players still pretending they care about independent small groups in this thread? we want new people to conquer conquering you gets old after you've become so traumatized that you're inured to further trama Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Marius8 DNS Requiem Brothers of Tangra 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:59:00 - [519] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Null players still pretending they care about independent small groups in this thread? of course, because most of these small groups are the income of these big groups (renting alliances)
Saint Hecate Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn 7	Posted - 2014.04.30 18:59:00 - [520] - Quote Id be okay with the changes if JF werent in the list. I dont want it to become harder to seed a market/maintain reasonable prices.
Petrus Blackshell Derelict Rifter Enterprise 3110	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:02:00 - [521] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: If this is really about curtailing power projection, then this should be aimed solely at dreadnoughts, carriers, supercarriers, titans, jump bridges and jump portals. In addition, these vessels should not be able to store isotopes in fleet hangars - which means carriers and supercarriers will be hit the hardest by having their effective operating range seriously curtailed. Black ops and jump freighters should receive a pass - essentially enhancing their range. Jump freighters should be removed from the game. Not without some changes making sure that there are still some ways to get stuff in remote places, be it hauling it in or making it locally. No need to screw over everyone in Omist. Once there exists incentive and means to get your own stuff locally rather than having to ship it down from hisec, yes, remove JFs and JBs. Until then, seriously nerfing both of those would go a long way to making distance actually meaningful. Rifterlings - newbie-friendly swashbuckling corp ("weflyrifters" in-game channel). Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 4	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:05:00 - [522] - Quote CCP Fozzie needs to be relocated to their mobile division. yeah I said it so what. thus far these announcements have been awesome. then this one comes along totally ruining my planned purchase of a jump freighter. hey CCP fozzie, since you obviously enjoy sticks up there. why don't you end AFK Cloaking campers? too scared to hurt your boyfriends feelings right?? why don't you place limits on cloaking modules?? too afraid to hurt your friends feelings right?? why don't you drop a mobile structure that points out here cloaky all day and night campers will be ?? too afraid it will hurt your little friends.. now this! seems you're trying to push folks out of the game, be warned little boy some major other games are on its way and this place needs subs as much as anyone.. I wouldn't tempt folks into leaving. its already bad enough as if is when you have a group controlling all facets of the game what happened to you fozzie..I once thought I could respect you and take your lead.. but now I see you for what you've always been.. CCP Goon Fozzie.
Ice Dealer Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 22	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:17:00 - [523] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. So, maybe I'm bad at math but... Currently: 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 66,666 isotopes at 0.15m3 First change proposal was: 2x fuel consumption, but 2x fuel bay, 20,000 JF fuel bay = 122,222 isotopes at 0.15m3. This means the JF has the same range. Second Change: 2x consumption, 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 100,000 isotopes at isotope change to 0.1m3. So, you are now nerfing range by 22.22%, which does not have anything to do with your stated goal. And unless I'm mistaken, you would be nerfing ALL range based on fuel bay capacity. You could try: -1/3 iso to 0.1m3. (Gives us a nice round number) 2x fuel costs. (for your goals) increase all fuel bays by 25%. (Increase current jump range by 1.02%, while maintaining round numbers.) Example: 12,500 m3 JF fuel bay = 125,000 isotopes at 0.1m3
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 5	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:18:00 - [524] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: If this is really about curtailing power projection, then this should be aimed solely at dreadnoughts, carriers, supercarriers, titans, jump bridges and jump portals. In addition, these vessels should not be able to store isotopes in fleet hangars - which means carriers and supercarriers will be hit the hardest by having their effective operating range seriously curtailed. Black ops and jump freighters should receive a pass - essentially enhancing their range. Jump freighters should be removed from the game. since they take away so much from the game.. CCP Goon Fozzie. why not allow freighters some slots and rigs???? what the point now of owning a jump freighter??.. thanks a lot ccp goon fozzie obviously fozzie-man was sitting out side burn jita watching the lucky few pilots who made it out. he got mad about it and sad "you know I need to make it even harder for those defenseless ships to jump. this is why that change is coming.. I see no reason for need to "stimulate" isotopes.. what for??? why cant he "stimulate" Cloak modules and demand they require more Fuel.. there's an idea.. but no oh noo fozzie cant think like that for it'll hurt his e-peen friends.
Marius8 DNS Requiem Brothers of Tangra 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:38:00 - [525] - Quote Ice Dealer wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. So, maybe I'm bad at math but... Currently: 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 66,666 isotopes at 0.15m3 First change proposal was: 2x fuel consumption, but 2x fuel bay, 20,000 JF fuel bay = 122,222 isotopes at 0.15m3. This means the JF has the same range. Second Change: 2x consumption, 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 100,000 isotopes at isotope change to 0.1m3. So, you are now nerfing range by 22.22%, which does not have anything to do with your stated goal. And unless I'm mistaken, you would be nerfing ALL range based on fuel bay capacity. You could try: -1/3 iso to 0.1m3. (Gives us a nice round number) 2x fuel costs. (for your goals) increase all fuel bays by 25%. (Increase current jump range by 1.02%, while maintaining round numbers.) Example: 12,500 m3 JF fuel bay = 125,000 isotopes at 0.1m3 its "just" 1.5 consumption (50% more, not 100% more)
Ice Dealer Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 22	Posted - 2014.04.30 19:48:00 - [526] - Quote Marius8 wrote: Ice Dealer wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to go ahead and use Resgo's suggestion. Instead of the increase in fuel bay size we will decrease the volume of isotopes by 1/3. OP updated. So, maybe I'm bad at math but... Currently: 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 66,666 isotopes at 0.15m3 First change proposal was: 2x fuel consumption, but 2x fuel bay, 20,000 JF fuel bay = 122,222 isotopes at 0.15m3. This means the JF has the same range. Second Change: 2x consumption, 10,000 m3 JF fuel bay = 100,000 isotopes at isotope change to 0.1m3. So, you are now nerfing range by 22.22%, which does not have anything to do with your stated goal. And unless I'm mistaken, you would be nerfing ALL range based on fuel bay capacity. You could try: -1/3 iso to 0.1m3. (Gives us a nice round number) 2x fuel costs. (for your goals) increase all fuel bays by 25%. (Increase current jump range by 1.02%, while maintaining round numbers.) Example: 12,500 m3 JF fuel bay = 125,000 isotopes at 0.1m3 its "just" 1.5 consumption (50% more, not 100% more) Thank you for that quick clarification. So this does keep the range of a ship the same as it was (excluding extra storage in hangers). It may increase jump costs IF CCP doesn't predict the price swings correctly. (If 50+% of high sec pos' s go dark, it could maybe even cause isotopes to drop by more then 50%. I guess only CCP can see how many by percent of isotopes go to which activities)
Gabriel Z Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 31	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:02:00 - [527] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: If this is really about curtailing power projection, then this should be aimed solely at dreadnoughts, carriers, supercarriers, titans, jump bridges and jump portals. In addition, these vessels should not be able to store isotopes in fleet hangars - which means carriers and supercarriers will be hit the hardest by having their effective operating range seriously curtailed. Black ops and jump freighters should receive a pass - essentially enhancing their range. Jump freighters should be removed from the game. Just what EVE needs: more time spent doing something other than combat. I'm sure that CCP will feature that prominently in an ad somewhere.
Shiti Dama Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 12	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:24:00 - [528] - Quote After thinking about this I came to the conclusion that I would prefer a large nerf to jump drives on all ship classes. - Decrease jump range by 30% - Add a module slot/rig slot for a jump drive and each jump causes 10% damage. Repairable with paste or station services, paste repair would take significant time. - Traveling in self SOV would reduce damage by 5% (arbitrary numbers) - Increase Bridge fuel consumption to be on equal level or higher then jump Drive consumption. Make logistics hurt for the little guys and by proxy they won't be able to (or wont make sense) to rent space, therefore prohibit renter income for the large alliances. No matter how high the cost is, large alliances will always have the upper hand, but by squeezing out the little guys at least renting would suffer, and that can only be a good thing IMHO.
addelee Hellfire Cult The East India Co. 85	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:37:00 - [529] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.[/b] The fact this idea came from a forum member and not the team and it's such an obvious thing that makes me think CCP have not thought about this one little bit.
Savage Chelien Polaris Rising Gentlemen's Agreement 1	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:51:00 - [530] - Quote This whole idea proves to me ccp fozzie has gone insane and needs to be locked up in a padded cell
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 20:58:00 - [531] - Quote Savage Chelien wrote: This whole idea proves to me ccp fozzie has gone insane and needs to be locked up in a padded cell I honestly think he's already started drinking before fan fest even begins in order to put up with the many geeks that decided to fly out there just to worship him. has fozzie transformed into king joffey?? one must ask this question.
Zennokyrie Hellfire Cult The East India Co. 4	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:25:00 - [532] - Quote Goals: Stimulate Isotope market to counter possible decrease in demand -Releasing restrictions on setting up a POS in high sec will increase supply of POS and increase demand of isotopes -Increase in demand for POS since it can use Teams w/o increased cost of using station. -Using Smaller starbases decrease Isotope demand (your assumption) -Not sure why you believe people would use Smaller POS TBH as New Station Slots make me want either: ---No POS and just use stations ---Large POS which is very defended while it holds valuable BPO/materials Help Incourage local resource gathering in 0.0* -Local resource gathering for Isotopes will not increase ---With decreased size isotopes, the cost to import them is not changed -Local resource gathering for Modules will not increase because they are so small even large cost changes barely effect it. ---Example: If you have 500isk/m3 for 0.0 Alliance JF services, you pay 2500 to move your Damage Control II ---Increasing the cost to 1000isk/m3 increases the cost to move it by 2500 More. Negligible. ---Due to 'economies of scale' (Teams in system and POSes) items can be made cheaper in high sec than 0.0 anyway to make up that hypothetical 2500 isk increase. -Local resource gathering for Ships will increase, slightly, as Tech 1 is generally made in 0.0 already due to shipping costs ---Nomad w/Freighter 4 can move 2160000 Isotopes before for 50m ---Nomad w/Freighter 4 can move 3240000 Isotopes before for 75m ---Move 50% more isotopes, at 50% increased moving cost. ---Note: Minerals will still cost more to move just not isotopes Disincentivize moving huge capital fleets often* -Others have made this obvious: It will not effect huge capital fleets -It Will effect Jump Freight services: Which costs get pushed to 'line members' But By: Increasing Fuel Costs by 50% for Jump drives and Portals -If you are just trying to increase Isotope usage why specify Jump drives? -I don't see this change doing anything but disencentivize the use of a Jump Freighter for 'heavy' stuff. Decreasing volume of Isotopes accordingly A good idea compared to increasing the fuel bay by 50% because of people already being required to use fleet hanger to hold fuel, even if it is only 2 jumps out and back for a carrier. This is assuming you don't want to change the distance Jump capable ships can go. CCP didn't realize how Mining Barge changes previously would get everyone in a Mackinaw, obviously CCP shouldn't make patches with the assumption of accurately predict human behavior. It is just obvious they are not good at it. Why don't you just wait and see how isotope price changes? It has already been increasing for the last few months without interference.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1306	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:27:00 - [533] - Quote addelee wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.[/b] The fact this idea came from a forum member and not the team and it's such an obvious thing that makes me think CCP have not thought about this one little bit. Brain dead mob: "CCP doesn't listens to player feedback!!" CCP listens some constructive player feedback, then the brain dead mob: "this is the prof that CCP doesn't have thought about this one little bit!!" You guys are ****. The Tears Must Flow
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 1033	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:28:00 - [534] - Quote Petrus Blackshell wrote: CCP WHY ARE YOU NERFING MY SUPER SAFE AND EASY AND CHEAP TELEPORTATION OMG GRR GOONZ Seriously? This is a great change, and I wish they didn't reduce the volume of isotopes, either. Transportation of stuff is the biggest imbalance of risk/reward/price in Eve, almost solely attributable to the ridiculous prevalence of jump drive and jump bridge mechanics. I understand it can't be removed (yet, anyway) or some places would turn into wastelands, but really there should be more effort, risk, or money involved in transporting large amount of stuff than clicking a cyno button, then a jump button, for the price of a couple tens of millions of ISK. All the "but my small alliance " talk is crock, too. Grow a real logistics wing. I own/fly a JF, and I have run a small corp/alliance. PLEASE NERF ME, CCP. For the good of the game. I was going to write almost precisely this. Good comment. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Sheimi Madaveda Arma Purgatorium Neutral in Local. 13412	Posted - 2014.04.30 21:29:00 - [535] - Quote Milla Goodpussy wrote: CCP Fozzie needs to be relocated to their mobile division. yeah I said it so what. thus far these announcements have been awesome. then this one comes along totally ruining my planned purchase of a jump freighter. why don't you end AFK Cloaking campers? too scared to hurt your boyfriends feelings right?? why don't you place limits on cloaking modules?? too afraid to hurt your friends feelings right?? why don't you drop a mobile structure that points out here cloaky all day and night campers will be ?? too afraid it will hurt your little friends.. now this! seems you're trying to push folks out of the game, be warned little boy some major other games are on its way and this place needs subs as much as anyone.. I wouldn't tempt folks into leaving. its already bad enough as if is when you have a group controlling all facets of the game what happened to you fozzie..I once thought I could respect you and take your lead.. but now I see you for what you've always been.. CCP Goon Fozzie. Your other posts convinced me partially that you are distraught and not merely trolling. The way I see what you have said is: You will go in a canoe over the atlantic ocean because the cost of going on a plane or boat went up by 50%. Or that because the bus now charges $1.50 per ride, it's suddenly better to bike on the interstate/highway with all your stuff strapped to your back. The fact that you resulted so quickly to personal attacks without stating any real reason besides "I feel bad about this" will simply make you a laughing stock, and I'd like to know what CCP/ISD thinks about posts like this - if they laugh, saying, "Oh look, there's another one!" or "Wow, these people are pretty touchy". Perhaps they take serious offense because they're normal people, after all... nah, all CCP are agents of Goonswarm because >insert conspiracy theory here<. Wait, nope, you didn't even provide one of those. I mean, Goonswarm doesn't have to move stuff, right? It just magically appears where they want it? Cloaks seem to affect your thinking way too much... a cloaked enemy can't do anything besides probe or -in the case of Covert Ops- warp around. If someone decides to sit cloaked forever while still being logged on, that's their choice. Tell me, would you grab the person sitting in the park and scream at them asking, "WHY AREN'T YOU DOING ANYTHING!?" because essentially, that is what you just did. Not only did you just do that, but you went to the authorities of that park and taunted them for not paying attention to why the person simply sitting in the park is a "serious problem". Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png-á
Stageweight Scorpion Ventures Rim Worlds Protectorate 0	Posted - 2014.04.30 22:02:00 - [536] - Quote This is going to have little effect on the massive alliances you are trying to target for power projection...Instead you are going to make it that much harder for small groups of players to move around resources so they can try to enjoy more of what the game has to offer. If your truely trying to target power projection, nerf the distance the jump drives can carry the captials, thus increasing the cost, time, and vulnerability of moving the captials. Another more subtle but potentially great nerf to power projection would be to make it so Titans have to be OUTSIDE POS SHIELD's to open a bridge. This would increase the vulnerability of the Titan's which frequently sit in fairly unguarded systems and POS's requiring coalitions to leave home defense forces in place thus GREATLY nerfing power projection in the process. Thought's? Just trying to promote coversation of ideas that truely address power projection instead of just hurting smaller groups of players.
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 27	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:02:00 - [537] - Quote Stageweight wrote: This is going to have little effect on the massive alliances you are trying to target for power projection...Instead you are going to make it that much harder for small groups of players to move around resources so they can try to enjoy more of what the game has to offer. If your truely trying to target power projection, nerf the distance the jump drives can carry the captials, thus increasing the cost, time, and vulnerability of moving the captials. Another more subtle but potentially great nerf to power projection would be to make it so Titans have to be OUTSIDE POS SHIELD's to open a bridge. This would increase the vulnerability of the Titan's which frequently sit in fairly unguarded systems and POS's requiring coalitions to leave home defense forces in place thus GREATLY nerfing power projection in the process. Thought's? Just trying to promote coversation of ideas that truely address power projection instead of just hurting smaller groups of players. scorpion they are goons goons have already half the economy in theyr pocket they dont care they are basicly targetting theyr compettitors aout the titan that was in the past that they had to come out of a pos to open a bridge most likely because goons lost a few titans that way they changed that somewhere in 2009 they dont want smaller goups to grow cause that would cause theyr power to diminish they will never allow that they want the smaller groups to merge into them to increase in strengh most of the gm's are goons so they only look at what is in theyr best interest and dont care about the rest GO BUG FIXING SO YOU DO SOMETHING USEFULL FOZZIE DONT MESS WITH MECHANICS YOU DONT UDNERSTAND LITTLE BRAINDEAD WANKER
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 477	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:07:00 - [538] - Quote boernl wrote: scorpion they are goons goons have already half the economy in theyr pocket they dont care they are basicly targetting theyr compettitors aout the titan that was in the past that they had to come out of a pos to open a bridge most likely because goons lost a few titans that way they changed that somewhere in 2009 they dont want smaller goups to grow cause that would cause theyr power to diminish they will never allow that they want the smaller groups to merge into them to increase in strengh most of the gm's are goons so they only look at what is in theyr best interest and dont care about the rest GO BUG FIXING SO YOU DO SOMETHING USEFULL FOZZIE DONT MESS WITH MECHANICS YOU DONT UDNERSTAND LITTLE BRAINDEAD WANKER I think exposure to the far-flung reaches of space that Brothers of Tangra controls has negatively affected your mind. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 27	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:17:00 - [539] - Quote Querns wrote: boernl wrote: scorpion they are goons goons have already half the economy in theyr pocket they dont care they are basicly targetting theyr compettitors aout the titan that was in the past that they had to come out of a pos to open a bridge most likely because goons lost a few titans that way they changed that somewhere in 2009 they dont want smaller goups to grow cause that would cause theyr power to diminish they will never allow that they want the smaller groups to merge into them to increase in strengh most of the gm's are goons so they only look at what is in theyr best interest and dont care about the rest GO BUG FIXING SO YOU DO SOMETHING USEFULL FOZZIE DONT MESS WITH MECHANICS YOU DONT UDNERSTAND LITTLE BRAINDEAD WANKER I think exposure to the far-flung reaches of space that Brothers of Tangra controls has negatively affected your mind. didnt expect another reaction from a goon ......
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 6	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:42:00 - [540] - Quote Hey CCP Goon Fozzie, I think you wanted feedback and have received it. thus far your dates have said they're cool with it cause they already can afford, yet you just upset myself amongst plenty others about the change. so goon brother please why not go further and address AFK camping since that's so easy and doesn't have any limitations? im just saying while you're excellent at thinking how humans will react we all know that most goons (not all) are not even human. place a fuel requirement on cloaking - there's a though stimulate liquid ozone markets.. how about that one. give freighters and jump freighters slots! with drone bays! - how about that one!. how about fixing the broken war dec system while you're at it?? oh I forgot its your job but instead pick on your friends enemies is much more fun. where is the balance to your level head. you know folks chanted that you were the guy that was cool. that really knew the game and what it's meant to be.. now I see you as the dev that created those aweful missions!. forcing me to deliver milk cartons and cows. this change sucks mr fozzie.. and that's all I have to say. if those are tears.. then next round is on me (hiccup)
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 479	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:53:00 - [541] - Quote Milla Goodpussy wrote: Hey CCP Goon Fozzie, I think you wanted feedback and have received it. thus far your dates have said they're cool with it cause they already can afford, yet you just upset myself amongst plenty others about the change. so goon brother please why not go further and address AFK camping since that's so easy and doesn't have any limitations? im just saying while you're excellent at thinking how humans will react we all know that most goons (not all) are not even human. place a fuel requirement on cloaking - there's a though stimulate liquid ozone markets.. how about that one. give freighters and jump freighters slots! with drone bays! - how about that one!. how about fixing the broken war dec system while you're at it?? oh I forgot its your job but instead pick on your friends enemies is much more fun. where is the balance to your level head. you know folks chanted that you were the guy that was cool. that really knew the game and what it's meant to be.. now I see you as the dev that created those aweful missions!. forcing me to deliver milk cartons and cows. this change sucks mr fozzie.. and that's all I have to say. if those are tears.. then next round is on me (hiccup) Ah, yes, the old and tired tactic of throwing up every real or perceived game flaw as flak in an attempt to delay or reverse a change. Preceding below this line in my post are the number of times this has worked: This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Mordus Angels 881	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:55:00 - [542] - Quote iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. I need 50% more fuel but only get a 33% increase by volume.....nerf. Double fucks blops that want to go anywhere without a fuel wagon.
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 5054	Posted - 2014.04.30 23:59:00 - [543] - Quote Onictus wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. I need 50% more fuel but only get a 33% increase by volume.....nerf. Double fucks blops that want to go anywhere without a fuel wagon. Do you even math?! .
Elana Apgar DarkMatter-Industries Upholders 2	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:10:00 - [544] - Quote Does anyone happen to have a link for the post that talks about the science fittings on being reduced? I'd like to see how/if this impacts running a reaction POS.
Babbet Bunny State War Academy Caldari State 11	Posted - 2014.05.01 00:37:00 - [545] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: The goals of this change are: [list] 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. Removing all status requirements for anchoring in high sec will reduce demand? As a high sec POS user I plan to continue with my current towers, but reduce the number of labs and increase the defense.
Sarah Nahrnid Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Nulli Secunda 31	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:25:00 - [546] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. The goals of this change are: :words: For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. Tell me more about how this affects Nullsec power blocs when we have people who mine 23/7 in drones (for example) and make 30-40b ISK per month. This affects nothing for larger entities and only affects smaller entities. TL;DR screwing the little guy and making no difference to the larger ones.
Wedgetail Helix Pulse Brothers of Tangra 91	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:40:00 - [547] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. "so we intend to decide upon player reactions to a rule set that hasn't even been explained in full yet let alone player tested or explored, in order to push forward a solution that doesn't actually address the original cause of the situation we're trying to compensate for with the undertone of trying to mess with power projection that isn't even half the monstrous problem that everyone is crying that it is." now don't get me wrong here, predicting behaviour ahead of time is a very useful skill, last time i used it against you personally i predicted every move in sequence you'd command your actor fleet to use against what was left of mine, so i do know it's a very good skill to be able to use. but what you're trying to do here and now goes beyond irresponsibility into the realms of outright stupidity. this summer expansion you are doing something your organisation hasn't bothered to do in a very long time, and that is to change the rules of the eve universe - we all hope in a way that'll make the game more interesting to play - but unlike what you're doing here we're still reserving judgement until we've actually seen how this'll work. and that is exactly what I am going to advise you to do now: nothing. the cause of this ice problem was most likely your alterations to harvester time and spawn mechanics of ice fields, thus your first priority order should be to simply scale those back so gathering ice isn't as quick and simple as breathing - that'll reduce supply and bring prices back to a more reasonable spot - something you say is your plan. and actually removes the source of the problem you say there is now. wait 6 months after the first real (summer) expansion you're going to have released in about 2.5 years, see what the players actually use your new rules to do THEN decide if you need to start messing with child systems in order to compensate for the problems your earlier changes to the parent system've caused. your people are far too intelligent to make such simple development mistakes so frequently. please, do your job and do it responsibly we could all use some breathable air. (i will not ask for fresh air from you yet that'd be too much) if your aim is to fix the problem being caused by something then address the mechanics that actually cause the error don't go messing with additional systems while ignoring the original cause it'll just compound the problem. (that said, by all means continue trying to cure the disease by burying symptoms if you value the height of your workload over the quality and stability of your mechanics)
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 480	Posted - 2014.05.01 02:59:00 - [548] - Quote Wedgetail wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. "so we intend to decide upon player reactions to a rule set that hasn't even been explained in full yet let alone player tested or explored, in order to push forward a solution that doesn't actually address the original cause of the situation we're trying to compensate for with the undertone of trying to mess with power projection that isn't even half the monstrous problem that everyone is crying that it is." now don't get me wrong here, predicting behaviour ahead of time is a very useful skill, last time i used it against you personally i predicted every move in sequence you'd command your actor fleet to use against what was left of mine, so i do know it's a very good skill to be able to use. but what you're trying to do here and now goes beyond irresponsibility into the realms of outright stupidity. this summer expansion you are doing something your organisation hasn't bothered to do in a very long time, and that is to change the rules of the eve universe - we all hope in a way that'll make the game more interesting to play - but unlike what you're doing here we're still reserving judgement until we've actually seen how this'll work. and that is exactly what I am going to advise you to do now: nothing. the cause of this ice problem was most likely your alterations to harvester time and spawn mechanics of ice fields, thus your first priority order should be to simply scale those back so gathering ice isn't as quick and simple as breathing - that'll reduce supply and bring prices back to a more reasonable spot - something you say is your plan. and actually removes the source of the problem you say there is now. wait 6 months after the first real (summer) expansion you're going to have released in about 2.5 years, see what the players actually use your new rules to do THEN decide if you need to start messing with child systems in order to compensate for the problems your earlier changes to the parent system've caused. your people are far too intelligent to make such simple development mistakes so frequently. please, do your job and do it responsibly we could all use some breathable air. (i will not ask for fresh air from you yet that'd be too much) if your aim is to fix the problem being caused by something then address the mechanics that actually cause the error don't go messing with additional systems while ignoring the original cause it'll just compound the problem. (that said, by all means continue trying to cure the disease by burying symptoms if you value the height of your workload over the quality and stability of your mechanics) This sure is an awful lot of words for a 33,725,996.07 isk increase in the cost of a full tank of Rhea nitropes. This is a 100 isk/m^3 increase. Have you considered that the adjustment just isn't that severe? This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 480	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:02:00 - [549] - Quote Hell, I pay 16m rewards on couriers in highsec. It just isn't enough isk to cut significantly into any profit margin that is actually worth a shit. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Wedgetail Helix Pulse Brothers of Tangra 91	Posted - 2014.05.01 03:04:00 - [550] - Quote Querns wrote: This sure is an awful lot of words for a 33,725,996.07 isk increase in the cost of a full tank of Rhea nitropes. This is a 100 isk/m^3 increase. Have you considered that the adjustment just isn't that severe? the adjustment itself isn't the issue - the reason for proposing it and the thinking leading to the choice it was necessary in the first place is. "your method doesn't mitigate the reason ice is over abundant in the first place it just tries to pretend the errors that caused the abundance never happened for no practical reason" is the line of thinking - if there genuinely was a problem that could only be solved by messing with fuel consumption then sure, however fuel wasn't the cause of the market price falls, changes to harvesting of ice was, so jump drive consumption is trying to cure a disease with the symptom and that's the part i rant about :)
Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Mordus Angels 883	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:11:00 - [551] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Onictus wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. I need 50% more fuel but only get a 33% increase by volume.....nerf. Double fucks blops that want to go anywhere without a fuel wagon. Do you even math?! By 1/3 not TO 1/3, there is a distinct difference, basically I can carry 133% of the fuel I can carry now, but I need 150% of the fuel to move the same distance. Do you ever math? Are you sure? If topes were being changed to 0.05m3 per unit it would be a net gain, but they aren't, they are going from 0.15 to 0.10...its still a 17% net loss in capacity.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 16	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:25:00 - [552] - Quote Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me.
Midori Tsu Evolution Northern Coalition. 129	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:44:00 - [553] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. You're not wrong, people just don't know how to do math.
Sheimi Madaveda Arma Purgatorium Neutral in Local. 13412	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:56:00 - [554] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. Your math is right, what people don't see at face value is that the modifications look like this: +50% means 3/2 of what it is right now. However, the size of the isotopes are being reduced by 1/3 so 3/3 - 1/3 = 2/3. Now, 3/2 x 2/3 = 6/6, which is the same thing as saying "1". Instead, people see % signs and get confused. Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png-á
George Boothe Blootered Bastards 37	Posted - 2014.05.01 04:58:00 - [555] - Quote Onictus wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Onictus wrote: iskflakes wrote: Thead Enco wrote: FFS, will you be expanding the fleet hangers on carriers? Fozzie fixed this issue by making the isotopes smaller. I need 50% more fuel but only get a 33% increase by volume.....nerf. Double fucks blops that want to go anywhere without a fuel wagon. Do you even math?! By 1/3 not TO 1/3, there is a distinct difference, basically I can carry 133% of the fuel I can carry now, but I need 150% of the fuel to move the same distance. Do you ever math? Are you sure? If topes were being changed to 0.05m3 per unit it would be a net gain, but they aren't, they are going from 0.15 to 0.10...its still a 17% net loss in capacity. Wow you REALLY cannot math.
ButtFungus SOONWAFFE 38	Posted - 2014.05.01 05:02:00 - [556] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. You are correct. To visualize it better, just imagine that it takes half a fuel bay of jump fuel to make 1 jump right now. So, you have 2 jumps in the bay now. If you increase the amount of fuel needed by 50%, you now need 3/4 of a fuel bay to make one jump, or 1.5 fuel bays to make 2 jumps. Increase the fuel bay 50% and you now have 1.5 fuel bays, space for 2 jumps of fuel. The other way is to make 1.5 fuel bays of fuel fit into 1.0 fuel bays by shrinking the fuel itself. 1.0 fuel bays is 2/3rds of 1.5 fuel bays, so you take away 1/3rd of the volume and now 1.5 fuel bays of fuel fit in 1.0 fuel bays. It gets confusing because increases apply to the smaller of the 2 numbers, where decreases apply to the larger. 2 + 50% = 3 is an increase based on 2 but going backwards, 3 - 33.333% = 2 is a decrease based on 3.
Valterra Craven 214	Posted - 2014.05.01 05:18:00 - [557] - Quote Fozzie, I think this change is a bit premature. In other words you have no data on how much or how little POS use will be affected by the proposed indy changes thus far. This is especially true since it seems like you guys are trying to nail down just what to do in order to still make it worthwhile to have multiple arrays/labs at once. So if you come up with a solution to that you've just radically increased costs for everyone... In that vien I have an interesting idea for pos that fits in with the infinite jobs idea and still keeps them needed in bulk: Parallelism. In other words the "killer feature" of POS would be to allow you to break up research jobs/prodcution jobs in parallel to complete them faster. You have two labs, you can break the research up on an infinite number of BPOS (limited by player skills) to complete twice as fast and so and so forth. I did some rough estimates, and it looks like with a dread gur tower and assuming labs cpu cost of 500 cpu would allow you to have 15 labs at once if that's all you put on it. So to balance this you could either hugely increase the cpu cost so that it wouldn't be wise to go over 3-4 labs, or limit the amount of jobs that you could run in parallel. (I'd say balance it on the average number of labs people run now). I'd also mess with the current numbers that labs give bonuses to so that they are closer to NPC stations. In this way, POS don't compete with NPC/Null stations in the same way, or don't give them any bonuses at all since this one is so powerful. (I haven't looked at production arrays, but the same principles apply here)
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 16	Posted - 2014.05.01 05:22:00 - [558] - Quote Midori Tsu wrote: Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. You're not wrong, people just don't know how to do math. Yeah, and it is fricken scary to see the number of people telling others they "can't do maths". But I wanted confirmation that I wasn't going crazy and spouting the wrong information on Eve Radio. I'm not a big fan of this change, but not because it will cost me 50% more to get anywhere or because it will hurt the big guy or the little guy. I just don't like the fact that CCP is trying to subsidize the isotope market and thus the ice miners when there is no clear evidence the changes to Indy are IN FACT going to cause a reduction in demand for ice products. There is every possibility that little to no change will occur. Some POS's may be reduced in size, but new POS's may spring up that never existed before. They could and should choose to wait for evidence before providing subsidies that prop up the ice miners. It wont take more than 15-30 days after the expansion to be able to see a change in the POS environment. Unless their real reason is not what they say it is, they should wait for evidence that backs up their story.
Midori Tsu Evolution Northern Coalition. 129	Posted - 2014.05.01 05:30:00 - [559] - Quote I agree, it's a bit premature to make this change at the moment. If it turns out that it is needed, that's fine, but don't fix what isn't broken.
Lena Lazair Khanid Irregulars 105	Posted - 2014.05.01 06:21:00 - [560] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Yeah, and it is fricken scary to see the number of people telling others they "can't do maths". But I wanted confirmation that I wasn't going crazy and spouting the wrong information on Eve Radio. Just to temper this a bit, the reduction in isotope size was added AFTER the initial dev blog was posted. The original plan was to increase the size of some fuel bays, but this was not sufficient for a lot of use cases. I'm pretty sure this change happened early on (I believe the CCP comment on it and updating the devblog is somewhere on the first or second page of comments), but still, it's hard to say who said what based on the old info.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 17	Posted - 2014.05.01 06:35:00 - [561] - Quote Lena Lazair wrote: Dirk MacGirk wrote: Yeah, and it is fricken scary to see the number of people telling others they "can't do maths". But I wanted confirmation that I wasn't going crazy and spouting the wrong information on Eve Radio. Just to temper this a bit, the reduction in isotope size was added AFTER the initial dev blog was posted. The original plan was to increase the size of some fuel bays, but this was not sufficient for a lot of use cases. I'm pretty sure this change happened early on (I believe the CCP comment on it and updating the devblog is somewhere on the first or second page of comments), but still, it's hard to say who said what based on the old info. Yes, the change came out a little bit after the devblog was released. BUT, many of these comments came out within the last few hours. So they are just not calculating it right. But let's also consider that the original devblog expanded all fuel bays by 50% in size (no change to the topes). That still equated to no nerf in range unless you assumed the need for storing fuel in fleet hangars i.e. carriers, supercarriers, titans. Let's call it the "possible extended range". Anyway, the fact is that this is no nerf to range. Just to cost.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 185	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:11:00 - [562] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. CCP Fozzie; You really have lost contact with eve as a game haven't you? Prices of Isotopes have increased by a little over 1/3rd since this was announced. So the cost of running a max skill Rhea just went from 50 mil to just under 100 mil. The last time Devs played with market manipulation with mining changes, prices for isotopes went for around 400 to 1000 and settled at around 500 to 700. This new bash at market manipulation should post patch see prices settle at between 850 to the current 1000. Adding approximately 1/3rd to projected price increases. The amount of jump fuel consumed vs the amount used for pos fuel - The way I use my capitals currently, around 25,000 pos's would have to be removed to justify your proposal. That is just based on my usage, so multiply that by the amount of capitals in use, your expecting at a rough guess over 2 million Pos's to be removed from the game due to industry changes. Quote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. Funny, just wayyyy too funny. 1st we'll lower skill requirements to get people to train into capitals, then (so devs can get a free laugh) make them unusable for all but the richest by more than doubling the cost to run them. These changes just so clearly smack of; CCP needs to sell more plex so we need to manipulate the "player driven" market and force prices up to the ridiculous, so people need to buy plex just to be able to fly and buy ships they have trained years for. OR (My personal thoughts); The Devs doing this really have no idea ( or have lost sight of) how eve works and are simply making it up as they go. My suggestion, give lead Devs 1 months pay to do nothing but play eve. Spend the 1st week as a rookie toon, just starting out. Then spend the next 3 weeks playing a toon with skills representative of the average player. Play both to your own play style but no using dev contacts to advance yourself.. IE; no joining a nulsec blob by telling recruiters who you are. I think most of the Devs who did this would find, the game they are trying to balance and improve is very different from what they perceive it to be. Statistics and metrics don't show anything close to what it is like living day to day as an eve player.
boernl Finis Coronat Opus Brothers of Tangra 30	Posted - 2014.05.01 11:17:00 - [563] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. CCP Fozzie; You really have lost contact with eve as a game haven't you? Prices of Isotopes have increased by a little over 1/3rd since this was announced. So the cost of running a max skill Rhea just went from 50 mil to just under 100 mil. The last time Devs played with market manipulation with mining changes, prices for isotopes went for around 400 to 1000 and settled at around 500 to 700. This new bash at market manipulation should post patch see prices settle at between 850 to the current 1000. Adding approximately 1/3rd to projected price increases. The amount of jump fuel consumed vs the amount used for pos fuel - The way I use my capitals currently, around 25,000 pos's would have to be removed to justify your proposal. That is just based on my usage, so multiply that by the amount of capitals in use, your expecting at a rough guess over 2 million Pos's to be removed from the game due to industry changes. Quote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. Funny, just wayyyy too funny. These changes just so clearly smack of; CCP needs to sell more plex so we need to manipulate the "player driven" market and force prices up to the ridiculous, so people need to buy plex just to be able to fly and buy ships they have trained years for. OR (My personal thoughts); The Devs doing this really have no idea ( or have lost sight of) how eve works and are simply making it up as they go. My suggestion, give lead Devs 1 months pay to do nothing but play eve. Spend the 1st week as a rookie toon, just starting out. Then spend the next 3 weeks playing a toon with skills representative of the average player. Play both to your own play style but no using dev contacts to advance yourself.. IE; no joining a nulsec blob by telling recruiters who you are. I think most of the Devs who did this would find, the game they are trying to balance and improve is very different from what they perceive it to be. Statistics and metrics don't show anything close to what it is like living day to day as an eve player. 1st we'll lower skill requirements to get people to train into capitals, then (so devs can get a free laugh) make them unusable for all but the richest by more than doubling the cost to run them. (nul blobs will see little change in use as they can afford the increased costs - to protect current holdings and take new space) finaly a post i can agree with completly
Saffear Stormrage sleep Deprivation INC. LLC Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.05.01 12:54:00 - [564] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. Some of the post on this are indeed wrong, However some like the one asking for a 40% increase in fuel bay for JF is explained as needed the extra space to carry extra fuel not so much to extend range but to reduce cost. currently you make a round trip deep into null you have sufficient, however you may have to purchase fuel where you land at a premium price. WIth the imposed changes this would not be practical or profitable for most traders or logistics personnel. The idea of the expanded fuel bay is to store more fuel that is bought at a low price. and before you say stock it in station, not all jf pilots use the same routes all the time and it would be a real pain to keep shipping the fuel bought at a lower price around.
Omi Motsu Boa Innovations Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.05.01 13:57:00 - [565] - Quote Well this is another stupid decision in a long string of stupid decisions that again benefit high SP players and large corporations/alliances. I thought the advent of depleting ice fields was meant stimulate the ice economy and increase competition. hasn't changed a thing. The current mechanics involving jump ships has seen more players move to nullsec then I have seen in long time through alliance renting who would have normally not considered going nullsec, now you have just made it cost 150% more for people to move to nullsec and do business. Way to go There is not one argument within this thread that has convinced me that this is a good thing for the game. In my view CCP your beginning to destroy a good game, soon it will be an average game it is just to hard for new players to get involved in the game without 2 years of investment and even then it is difficult to enjoy the game. But everyone should realise by now that it doesn't matter what the community wants, CCP don't care and the changes will go ahead no matter what everyone says.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 19	Posted - 2014.05.01 16:41:00 - [566] - Quote Saffear Stormrage wrote: Dirk MacGirk wrote: Is my math somehow wrong? I keep seeing these people talking about range being nerfed because they see a 50% increase in consumption but only a 33% decrease in the m3 of topes. Current JF Fuel Bay = 10,000 m3 = 66,666 topes @ 0.15 m3 / tope Future JF Fuel Bay - 10,000 m3 = 100,000 topes @ 0.10 m3 / tope Wherever you could go using 66,666 isotopes today will require 99,999 topes tomorrow (66,666 * 1.50) Seems to me that 100,000 topes can cover it. And the same math works for any other jump capable ship. A 1/3 reduction in the m3 of topes fully compensates for the 50% increase in consumption. Or am I completely wrong? Seriously, I don't think I am, but the number of posts saying JF's need to have a bigger fuel bay is confusing the living hell out of me. Some of the post on this are indeed wrong, However some like the one asking for a 40% increase in fuel bay for JF is explained as needed the extra space to carry extra fuel not so much to extend range but to reduce cost. currently you make a round trip deep into null you have sufficient, however you may have to purchase fuel where you land at a premium price. WIth the imposed changes this would not be practical or profitable for most traders or logistics personnel. The idea of the expanded fuel bay is to store more fuel that is bought at a low price. and before you say stock it in station, not all jf pilots use the same routes all the time and it would be a real pain to keep shipping the fuel bought at a lower price around. Ah, I see. Yeah I don't buy that. Jump freighters have this quirky thing called a cargo hold that can carry extra fuel. Might not be able to carry as much cargo if you have to use some space for fuel, but that's a choice for going into deep space. It really has no place in this conversation about increasing the consumption.
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 698	Posted - 2014.05.01 17:35:00 - [567] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. TRANSLATION: We posted this CR4P at this time hoping that the hype over Fanfest would put it at the back of people's minds and help them to forget what a complete pile of **** it is. Oh, and just like in the past, we are bringing it in anyway, regardless of any negative feed back.... which we will ignore completely and just highlight one or two posts that think its an awesome idea.
addelee Hellfire Cult The East India Co. 88	Posted - 2014.05.01 18:21:00 - [568] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: addelee wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.[/b] The fact this idea came from a forum member and not the team and it's such an obvious thing that makes me think CCP have not thought about this one little bit. Brain dead mob: "CCP doesn't listens to player feedback!!" CCP listens some constructive player feedback, then the brain dead mob: "this is the prof that CCP doesn't have thought about this one little bit!!" You guys are ****. That wasn't at all what I was getting at. Yes, the feedback was constructive and yes, CCP listened. However, the feedback wasn't exactly rocket science and to solve that original problem wouldn't have taken too much time if your job was to think about such things. I do agree with removing or at least limiting the whole teleportation in Eve therefore hitting JF pilots is one way. However, in the scheme of things, I don't think this is the fix. I don't know what is but picking a number out of the air seems strange. I do think that if the bottlenecks for nullsec manufacturing where leveled out slightly then carting stuff from HS to null would be reduced as production could run normally in null. The risk vs reward seems conflicting in itself when there is so very very little risk and supply issues in Highsec compared to null manufacture.
Suzuka A1 Multiplex Gaming Li3 Federation 17	Posted - 2014.05.01 20:07:00 - [569] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: The biggest spoiled little brats in the game are crying like bitches, this just proves that the changes happening are way overdue. Thank you CCP and keep fixing EvE Online. Calling people "spoiled little brats" and saying people are "crying like bitches" proves you are immature and don't know how to give constructive criticism and, therefore, brings your credibility to zero. Btw, people "crying" proves absolutely nothing. 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
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 19	Posted - 2014.05.01 20:42:00 - [570] - Quote Suzuka A1 wrote: Vaju Enki wrote: The biggest spoiled little brats in the game are crying like bitches, this just proves that the changes happening are way overdue. Thank you CCP and keep fixing EvE Online. Calling people "spoiled little brats" and saying people are "crying like bitches" proves you are immature and don't know how to give constructive criticism and, therefore, brings your credibility to zero. Btw, people "crying" proves absolutely nothing. Pretty much that. The argument of the ignorant. Can't formulate a valid counter so they resort to their roots.

ISD Ezwal ISD Community Communications Liaisons 1233	Posted - 2014.05.01 20:55:00 - [571] - Quote Thread temporarily locked for some cleaning. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department

Sheimi Madaveda Arma Purgatorium Neutral in Local. 13412	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:02:00 - [572] - Quote ISD Ezwal wrote: I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil! snip Thread reopened. Ezwal, I appreciate the work you do, but you did just scare me. I suppose I would have received a warning if I had done anything wrong, so I'm not going to worry about what's gone. Anyways, not sure why Ezwal deleted this, but the jump drive stuff will stay the same distance: Adding 50% is the same as +1/2, so you consume 3/2. Now, you're reducing the size of isotopes by 1/3, so 3/3 - 1/3 = 2/3. 3/2 * 2/3 = 6/6 = 1. Back where we started :) Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png-á
TheMercenaryKing StarFleet Enterprises StarFleet. 175	Posted - 2014.05.01 23:42:00 - [573] - Quote Sheimi Madaveda wrote: ISD Ezwal wrote: I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil! snip Thread reopened. Ezwal, I appreciate the work you do, but you did just scare me. I suppose I would have received a warning if I had done anything wrong, so I'm not going to worry about what's gone. Anyways, not sure why Ezwal deleted this, but the jump drive stuff will stay the same distance: Adding 50% is the same as +1/2, so you consume 3/2. Now, you're reducing the size of isotopes by 1/3, so 3/3 - 1/3 = 2/3. 3/2 * 2/3 = 6/6 = 1. Back where we started :) The problem most of us have is not that the range will change. The problem is that the change will increase the cost of fuel to jump by 50% (1.5x current cost). The reason they give for this change is market speculation. There is no solid evidence that the market for isotopes will change at all after this expansion. If anything, at which point CCP should just come out and say it. is they want to make it harder for alliance to move around capital fleets. If that is the case, they are doing it wrong because they are hurting smaller entities the most by this idea.
Andy Koraka PonyWaffe I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 31	Posted - 2014.05.02 00:27:00 - [574] - Quote I guess what I ask myself looking at this change is: "How would this change improve the overall quality of gameplay, and make the game more fun?" On the positive side, the guy ISBoxing 20 Mackinaws while watching Netflix gets an income buff. On the negative side, this change adds significant inertia against player interactions for almost everyone involved in 0.0 game play. Overcoming inertia is distinctly unfun. No, I'm not even referring to Capital combat, because when an FC decides whether or not to commit (at a minimum) tens of billions in ships, the fuel cost isn't a factor. (it usually gets reimbursed anyway) I'm referring to subcaps, primarily the logistics surrounding them. Right now the lion's share of inertia that makes EvE unfun involves finding a fight, nothing is less fun than taking a 60 gate roam through mostly empty space and wasting 2 hours. To overcome the inertia of distance players routinely "deploy" to hot-spot regions in search of conflict. After this change goes live, groups will still need to deploy to find content because Dominion era Sov has no conflict drivers accessible to anything less than a full subcap fleet. The only difference is that your average player will have to spend more un-fun time grinding ISK to access the fun parts of EvE. I know there's supposed to be a long term nullsec-industry angle this change is working towards, but the reality is that large scale nullsec industry is not viable, and even after the proposed summer changes it still won't be viable, so players will end up eating the extra jump fuel cost. I don't really see any way this change makes the game better or more fun, which I think would be a priority since having fun is what keeps players from unsubbing.
Sheimi Madaveda Arma Purgatorium Neutral in Local. 13412	Posted - 2014.05.02 01:21:00 - [575] - Quote TheMercenaryKing wrote: The problem most of us have is not that the range will change. The problem is that the change will increase the cost of fuel to jump by 50% (1.5x current cost). The reason they give for this change is market speculation. There is no solid evidence that the market for isotopes will change at all after this expansion. If anything, at which point CCP should just come out and say it. is they want to make it harder for alliance to move around capital fleets. If that is the case, they are doing it wrong because they are hurting smaller entities the most by this idea. Oh, I understand the worries just fine. I'm among one of those small groups that uses JF quite often. It's just nice to explain things in terms that most people can grasp versus showing lots of % signs and giving open-ended statements. The fact that this hits JFs makes me frown, but I don't know just how it will turn out in the end, despite the appearance of bad news. There's a lot of changes coming after all :s Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png-á
ButtFungus SOONWAFFE 38	Posted - 2014.05.02 01:25:00 - [576] - 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. 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. The reasons vary, but all seem to agree that the plan is poorly thought out, the reasons given seem like reverse justifying a decision you have already made, and that the plan has a "hidden" agenda in regards to power projection. You have proven you listen to us here by changing the fuel bay increase to an isotope volume reduction based on a player's post. I urge you to listen to the underlying tone of the messages in this thread now. People are baffled by your decision and the reasons behind it. When people don't understand the decisions their leaders make, they begin to question whether the leaders can make good decisions, and begin to lose faith in them. If you aren't open with us now about this change, players are going to lose faith in you Fozzie. You've brought a lot to Eve, and it would be a shame to see all your future ideas met with scorn simply because they came from you.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 19	Posted - 2014.05.02 02:47:00 - [577] - Quote 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. 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. 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. The reasons vary, but all seem to agree that the plan is poorly thought out, the reasons given seem like reverse justifying a decision you have already made, and that the plan has a "hidden" agenda in regards to power projection. You have proven you listen to us here by changing the fuel bay increase to an isotope volume reduction based on a player's post. I urge you to listen to the underlying tone of the messages in this thread now. People are baffled by your decision and the reasons behind it. When people don't understand the decisions their leaders make, they begin to question whether the leaders can make good decisions, and begin to lose faith in them. If you aren't open with us now about this change, players are going to lose faith in you Fozzie. You've brought a lot to Eve, and it would be a shame to see all your future ideas met with scorn simply because they came from you. 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:
Venix An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE 1	Posted - 2014.05.02 03:53:00 - [578] - Quote "Dislike Button"
zentary Wrath of Angels Vanguard. 3	Posted - 2014.05.02 04:35:00 - [579] - Quote 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.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 417	Posted - 2014.05.02 05:04:00 - [580] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection... I think you should change isotope consumption so that it does significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection. Let's face facts - null is static and needs a shake-up. Trying to keep things "balanced" isn't the answer. Wars are forced by shortages of resources, not gluts - and that is the major flaw in the "make null self-sufficient" plan. There are too many resources available in null, and insufficient reason for anyone to need to force a major conflict. Cut off the oil and let's see what happens.
Alvatore DiMarco Capricious Endeavours Ltd 2171	Posted - 2014.05.02 06:01:00 - [581] - Quote If you cut off the oil in nullsec, they'll just get it from highsec instead.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 188	Posted - 2014.05.02 06:06:00 - [582] - Quote Sheimi Madaveda wrote: TheMercenaryKing wrote: The problem most of us have is not that the range will change. The problem is that the change will increase the cost of fuel to jump by 50% (1.5x current cost). The reason they give for this change is market speculation. There is no solid evidence that the market for isotopes will change at all after this expansion. If anything, at which point CCP should just come out and say it. is they want to make it harder for alliance to move around capital fleets. If that is the case, they are doing it wrong because they are hurting smaller entities the most by this idea. Oh, I understand the worries just fine. I'm among one of those small groups that uses JF quite often. It's just nice to explain things in terms that most people can grasp versus showing lots of % signs and giving open-ended statements. The fact that this hits JFs makes me frown, but I don't know just how it will turn out in the end, despite the appearance of bad news. There's a lot of changes coming after all :s Unless CCP has some plan to double the amount of ice belts in nul and make nullified skiffs, so they are more than just killboard fodder for the 1st ceptor gang to come along. This change brings nothing more than increased costs for all capital pilots and any line pilot who relies on JF logistics for supplies.. Nulsec mining industry will not suddenly become attractive because capitals need more topes - In fact you are likely to see the opposite because it now costs more to move a mining gang around in nulsec, they just won't do it. If the price of topes goes up to make it again viable to jump Rorquals around, then everyone else is paying the higher cost too. 50% increased to jump + increased cost for topes, yeah, good result if your goal is to further nerf capital use. Capitals for many, don't see a lot of use now due to related costs, adding more to that with increased logistics costs, will see even less fielded. On a more serious note - Is giving botters more incentive to risk the ban really the right direction to go? Miner 1 to 20 and a Rorqual is a fairly common sight now in parts of nul, is it really something CCP wants to encourage? Jump Freighter pilots who are not fuel subsidized will have to try and find a way to pass the increased cost of logistics onto an already complaining group of pilots. Titans will not bridge for roams if costs out way potential kills - isk war is important to win - So by increasing the cost to bridge a fleet, Devs are actually decreasing Pvp opportunities in nulsec Carrier with JFC 4, travelling 30 LY, isotopes @ 800 isk per 18,000 isotopes @ 14,648,800 isk + 50% = 27,000 topes @ 21,600,000 isk JFC 5 Carrier, 30 LY, isotpoes @ 800 isk per 15,000 isotopes @ 12,000,000 isk + 50% 22,750 topes @ 18,200,000 isk **JDC 5 reduces this, a small amount. JDC 5 + JFC 5 uses about 400 less topes so you save 300,000 isk in fuel for a 30 LY jump The amount of pos's that get removed due to Devs changing the way industrialists use them - Should not have to be paid for by Capital ship pilots. If the cost of 1 item needs to be increased due to Devs changing the way 1 sector of Eve interacts with it - That cost should be built into the changes, in this case, less isotopes being used by industrialists - should be paid for by industrialists - Not Capital Pilots Here was me thinking CCP wanted to encourage more PVP, not reduce it by adding fuel costs into the isk war equation.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 188	Posted - 2014.05.02 07:19:00 - [583] - Quote 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.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 395	Posted - 2014.05.02 07:26:00 - [584] - Quote The reason why nullsec is broken IS because of the carriers/jump bridges and titan bridges. Because of this we see large renting empires, and alliances holding few regions, but using only few pockets in all of those regions - because they can, and at current state this is cheap - this 50% increase will not change much - but lets hope that at least this will allow lowsec people to get some of the moons in space where they are living for years. Titan bridges are actually reducing small scale PVP. I saw countless times when we didn't engage some other roaming group , as their titan was logged in, or someone was not engaging us , as rest of the fleet was sitting on a titan bridge. As long as you can move ( and this is profitable ) 500 people from one edge of eve to another in an hour - eve nullsec will not change. Currently at some point there is no reason to fight someone when as when they are loosing they just drop 70 more carriers/motherships. Now it will cost a bit more to do it. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
Sheimi Madaveda Arma Purgatorium Neutral in Local. 13414	Posted - 2014.05.02 07:39:00 - [585] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: snip The amount of pos's that get removed due to Devs changing the way industrialists use them - Should not have to be paid for by Capital ship pilots. If the cost of 1 item needs to be increased due to Devs changing the way 1 sector of Eve interacts with it - That cost should be built into the changes, in this case, less isotopes being used by industrialists - should be paid for by industrialists - Not Capital Pilots Here was me thinking CCP wanted to encourage more PVP, not reduce it by adding fuel costs into the isk war equation. Underlined section explains my opinion. On the other hand, with the upcoming changes, I can't help but think industry players will have more incentive to spread out. Taking into account that moving assets around will be more costly, it will point the game in a whole new direction. Local industries in low/null are going to get more attention because high sec will become a worse place to make profit. Yes, the ice miner might get an income boost, but complaining about miners making ISK is comparable to a miner looking at a combat ship get changed from a 5% RoF bonus to a 5% damage bonus because it uses less ammunition and relies on industry ammo a bit less. I think most people agree that mining should be more interactive than it is right now. As you noted: Increased cost = deterrent, and depending on just how many isotopes were being used by POS, it is plausible that their price will drop as the demand won't increase by a solid 50% and may in fact decrease from what it is right now if you take into consideration the deterrent factor. There's a lot of things like this that make me hold back final judgment, and I simply have to see TQ change to get a proper evaluation of this. Arma Purgatorium - Once for the State, Now for the King Low Sec, PvP, Industrial - Open for Recruiting http://armapurgatorium.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/arpur_recruit1.png-á
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 471	Posted - 2014.05.02 08:17:00 - [586] - Quote Then again a small tinfoil remark: Caldari Caps and Scaps are getting buffed in the Summer Expansion. Who sits in Caldari Ice regions?
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 188	Posted - 2014.05.02 08:30:00 - [587] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: The reason why nullsec is broken IS because of the carriers/jump bridges and titan bridges. Because of this we see large renting empires, and alliances holding few regions, but using only few pockets in all of those regions - because they can, and at current state this is cheap - this 50% increase will not change much - but lets hope that at least this will allow lowsec people to get some of the moons in space where they are living for years. Titan bridges are actually reducing small scale PVP. I saw countless times when we didn't engage some other roaming group , as their titan was logged in, or someone was not engaging us , as rest of the fleet was sitting on a titan bridge. As long as you can move ( and this is profitable ) 500 people from one edge of eve to another in an hour - eve nullsec will not change. Currently at some point there is no reason to fight someone when as when they are loosing they just drop 70 more carriers/motherships. Now it will cost a bit more to do it. When it comes to dropping 70 more supers and carriers, as you put it.. Cost is not coming into it.. 1 Super is worth far more than the little extra needed for fuel. Plus if a fight has escalated to that degree, there are already hundreds of such ships on field. Being both a carrier and dread capable pilot - we don't use them anywhere near as much as a lot of us would like. There are a couple of groups who hold capital supremacy now and will continue to do so, these changes will help them a great deal as far as this goes. Your right, Sov nul is very stagnant but the extra cost of using capitals is not going to change that. What it will do is encourage everyone to turtle up and simply protect what they have. ----- ----- You won't engage a "roaming group" for fear they have another fleet sitting on a titan waiting to jump in?? I have to ask, how big is the fleet you are in and how big is the "roaming fleet". No offence but I know from experience when group A has 200 in fleet they will as quickly as possible engage B, enemy fleet of 50. That said, your happy to engage with odds of 4 to 1 in your favor but refuse to engage if the odds "might" be 4 to 1 against ??? There is nothing fair about Eve Pvp and using the excuse of - They might have backup so we can't fight, is just really, really sad. If your not prepared to lose it - Don't fly it. If your too afraid to engage because they "might" have backup on a Titan somewhere - get more spies in enemy alliances, improve your intel. If nothing else works for you, there is level 4 missions. If renters want jump bridges, carriers or Titans, they provide their own, or pay someone to bring theirs. I thought it fairly common knowledge among nul dwellers - Renters, rent systems, that rent rarely if ever provides them with any sort of protection. Part of renting is, you protect your own. That is not to say if 1 nulblob invaded another's renter space with the intention of taking it over they would not go to protect it but as for protecting the renters themselves - probably not. Adding to the cost to use capitals only hurts the small guy and simply makes the already dominant groups, more dominant.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 395	Posted - 2014.05.02 09:04:00 - [588] - Quote You are right but not in all aspects. Roaming groups - 5-10 people max. If you know that other group you want to engage is having 40 man backup on titan , will you engage ? This will be 5:1 , and they already reshipped that they will hit you hard. When i told - drop another 70 carriers/ mother ships this is with the assumption that your enemy already deployed some forces to the battlefield and you manage to overwhelm them. You could be surprised how often we had situation where the escalation path was : 1. 1-2 capitals tackled 2. 10 more arrived , but capitals we managed to split capitals , and again tackle 1-2 of them 3. 50 more arrive 4. split 5. 50 more arrive ( and we have 40 man sub capital group) No this will not change the situation , enemy will be still escalating to save capitals , but you will be putting pressure on the isk cost of this operations. Currently bloobs have vast areas , as relocation cost are low - they will be still having those vast areas after this change , but they will have to calculate. Have all r32/r64 on the borders , or some of them , at some point are not worth defending , and at some point - are all border systems worth defending? We don't have moons, no on EVER rented them... Example. You are small lowsec group. You live in system XYZ for last 3 years , bigger bloob owns all valuable moons in this system, but they don't live here - they just login alt every 1h to check if there are no siphons. There are 3 r32 moons in the system - nothing fancy. Now if CCP will escalate cost of power projection in the proper way , let say that doping 250 man fleet will cost way more than now, or deploying carriers then current occupants of this lowsec system can do very simple thing : 1. ref those towers 2. bloob will deploy few carriers to rep them at the timer 3. tackle those carriers , and force bloob to escalate 4. when bloob arrives - disengage ( this costed them 700mil , you didn't loose any ship, or a dictor , you will probably kill some stranglers ) Return to point 1. At some point someone in this bloob will notice that bloob is burring 5b fuel / month to save 3 towers that give 1.5bil income. Summer 2014 - Jump Bridge Changes
Wedgetail Helix Pulse Brothers of Tangra 94	Posted - 2014.05.02 09:45:00 - [589] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: You are right but not in all aspects. Roaming groups - 5-10 people max. If you know that other group you want to engage is having 40 man backup on titan , will you engage ? This will be 5:1 , and they already reshipped that they will hit you hard. When i told - drop another 70 carriers/ mother ships this is with the assumption that your enemy already deployed some forces to the battlefield and you manage to overwhelm them. You could be surprised how often we had situation where the escalation path was : 1. 1-2 capitals tackled 2. 10 more arrived , but capitals we managed to split capitals , and again tackle 1-2 of them 3. 50 more arrive 4. split 5. 50 more arrive ( and we have 40 man sub capital group) No this will not change the situation , enemy will be still escalating to save capitals , but you will be putting pressure on the isk cost of this operations. Currently bloobs have vast areas , as relocation cost are low - they will be still having those vast areas after this change , but they will have to calculate. Have all r32/r64 on the borders , or some of them , at some point are not worth defending , and at some point - are all border systems worth defending? We don't have moons, no on EVER rented them... Example. You are small lowsec group. You live in system XYZ for last 3 years , bigger bloob owns all valuable moons in this system, but they don't live here - they just login alt every 1h to check if there are no siphons. There are 3 r32 moons in the system - nothing fancy. Now if CCP will escalate cost of power projection in the proper way , let say that doping 250 man fleet will cost way more than now, or deploying carriers then current occupants of this lowsec system can do very simple thing : 1. ref those towers 2. bloob will deploy few carriers to rep them at the timer 3. tackle those carriers , and force bloob to escalate 4. when bloob arrives - disengage ( this costed them 700mil , you didn't loose any ship, or a dictor , you will probably kill some stranglers ) Return to point 1. At some point someone in this bloob will notice that bloob is burring 5b fuel / month to save 3 towers that give 1.5bil income. what you're complaining about here mate's simply that 'they can have more people around to respond to you at any point that you do' that's not poorly balanced power projection it's simply that they have a greater standing force than you do, and you have no means to block them from using it. you want to fix projection make cynos time deployed structures like the ESS, mobile depot and inhibitor, remove instant activation cynos on ships and lo and behold suddenly your gang can actually block their hot drop by destroying the cyno structure before it activates. the issue here isn't one of 'we can all move across the universe' it's 'we can't block other people from landing on us' - this is why the cyno nullifier was introduced in the first place - as a means to effect this.
Meytal School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 369	Posted - 2014.05.02 13:18:00 - [590] - Quote Your proposed changes, while having minor effect on me personally, are rustling the jimmies of people who do Nullsec logistics. We in wormholes enjoy hearing them cry, to be honest, particularly in the case of logistics :) If local industry in Null is your goal, with zero or minimal import from Hisec, not sharing this goal while making multiple minor nerfs like this will only cause prolonged grumbling. Instead, if that is your plan then announce that it is your plan, say it will be fully implemented over several months time to give people a chance to prepare, and begin putting in place measures that achieve that plan, clearly detailing each step along the way with sufficient advanced notice to enable entities to adapt. Once you prop up local industry and remove the majority of the Nullsec reliance on Hisec and Jita, then you can be in a better place to reduce power projection.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 395	Posted - 2014.05.02 13:41:00 - [591] - Quote Meytal wrote: Your proposed changes, while having minor effect on me personally, are rustling the jimmies of people who do Nullsec logistics. We in wormholes enjoy hearing them cry, to be honest, particularly in the case of logistics :) If local industry in Null is your goal, with zero or minimal import from Hisec, not sharing this goal while making multiple minor nerfs like this will only cause prolonged grumbling. Instead, if that is your plan then announce that it is your plan, say it will be fully implemented over several months time to give people a chance to prepare, and begin putting in place measures that achieve that plan, clearly detailing each step along the way with sufficient advanced notice to enable entities to adapt. Once you prop up local industry and remove the majority of the Nullsec reliance on Hisec and Jita, then you can be in a better place to reduce power projection. Not when you can haul in your carrier all the stuff you need on the other side of eve - and the cost are equal almost to nothing. Try moving your t2 ahac from one side of the eve to another. Someone will kill you during this trip or you arrive to your destination few hours later. Now try to move few different doctrines in a carrier using fleet cynochain. You will be safely done in 10minutes. Time is also isk, and if you don't have local industry - you or some logistic guy will just haul all needed stuff for you. In WH there is no issue with power projection. How long you could live in your WH when time needed for enemy to reinforce/ kill your pos is smaller than time needed for cap on carrier /super fleet to recharge? Can you counter this? No , check HED , and B-R and other large scale engagement. Node will crash Server will be bugged This will be going on till the downtime. I think CCP have god idea to escalate cost - the more this kind of fight will cost , the better. The more ways for smaller groups to escalate cost for bloobs - the better. When someone will pay fifth time 6 billion to rescue tackled carriers reaping pos in some forgotten lowsec in one week - the most likely this blob will remove this tower by them self , as it already costed more in terms of fuel than a year income from the moon. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 313	Posted - 2014.05.02 15:04:00 - [592] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: When someone will pay fifth time 6 billion to rescue tackled carriers reaping pos in some forgotten lowsec in one week - the most likely this blob will remove this tower by them self , as it already costed more in terms of fuel than a year income from the moon. Maybe, but I think you're underestimating the influence human nature can have on the choices players make. People routinely throw tons of ships away just for the sheer joy of watching explosions, their own and others. They do it for fun. People will risk expensive ships to save cheaper ones. They do it for pride. They will jump their supers across vast distances despite it being less than cost effective, because super pilots are bored and will drop on anything, the sillier the better. They do it for tears. It's not just about feeding cost and risk into an equation. In fact it's rarely that.
Maduin Shi Breakwater Testing Inc Aegis Requiem 5	Posted - 2014.05.02 18:47:00 - [593] - Quote Fozzie, why don't you just come out and say y'all at CCP want POS owners and cap ship pilots to fuel their activities with PLEX? I mean lets just cut to the meat here with isotope consumption. Lets just charge a fraction of a PLEX to run a tower or a jump capable ship. Because its already heading in that direction with all the industry costs going up and POS usage going UP (w/ no standings requirements, bonused mfg and research arrays, and better refining arrays than NPC stations) after the summer patch. POS usage is NOT gonna go down, imo. Every corp is gonna be running a large hisec dickstar POS out in the sticks to do all their industry/research/copying/refining on the cheap and spread the fuel costs across all these activities. There's way more small corps out there that are gonna put up a POS after the patch - it will far outweigh the drop in research POS's. Plus there's considerably more prime real-estate opening up for anchoring. I can't believe you're gonna put in this dramatic increase to isotope consumption without waiting to see how the market adjusts to the summer patch, based on forward-looking speculation that is complete derp guesswork at this point since there are so many changes, literally nobody knows how the player base will react. But I can tell you, most folks aren't buying the line that its to offset a drop in POS usage after the patch. So what is this about really? I see all the costs going up for all industry and reprocessing, and the nerf to ice spawns and the dramatic rise in POS fuel costs that resulted. I saw the stealth nerf to mining yields with the most heavily used barges (retriever/macks) taking a yield hit, and the other barges getting token buffs that don't come close to offsetting. Now this. I mean, JF's and Rorq haulers are getting totally *****d on. You literally cannot justify the ISK vs. risk equation of living in low or null without being able to jump freight your goods at reasonable cost. So what's the end goal to all this, just come out with it. Is it to make the gameplay so expensive that we have to buy PLEX to maintain current lifestyles? I mean why is it that all the really big, far reaching changes lately have been resulting in massive cost-of-living increases? WTF is up with that? You're gonna have to at least exclude JF's and Rorqs to placate the masses. Bare minimum.
sabastyian Death By Design Did he say Jump 22	Posted - 2014.05.02 20:27:00 - [594] - Quote CCP Fozzie, why do you post these threads for "feedback" then chose to completely ignore any amount of feedback you receive? This increase in isotopes is trying to fix an issue that won't exist simply because with standings removed for towers there will actually be more towers going up in high-sec. Trying to "stimulate the market" based on "everybody be takin down dem towers, we gotta make iskies for dem miners" is a fools move. The sheer amount of isotopes used for fuel and towers out-side of high-sec far out-weighs the amount of towers being used for research in high-sec. Increasing the base cost of any move by 50% is only going to hurt smaller organizations as larger organizations have the isk and back-bone to deal with it. A Move for my corp costs ( pre price increase ) around 5- 7.5b, increase the cost by 50% and its looking at 7.5-11.25b to move. Didn't you learn about listening to feedback just recently? The nestor is the most useless battleship in eve and I have only seen 3 ( 2 of which my corp owns just to say they own nestors ) since their release. The exact things the playe-rbase said would make Nestors nonviable proved to be true. The fact that there are more pages of feedback then your original post has "likes" says something.
Ravcharas Infinite Point Nulli Secunda 318	Posted - 2014.05.02 20:47:00 - [595] - Quote sabastyian wrote: CCP Fozzie, why do you post these threads for "feedback" then chose to completely ignore any amount of feedback you receive? Give him a minute to deal with fanfest, would you?
Dasi Environment of Evolution Brothers of Tangra 0	Posted - 2014.05.02 21:41:00 - [596] - Quote Wow, this is only going to hurt small corps while having ZERO effect on large alliances. Thanks a lot for sticking it to the little guy as usual.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 196	Posted - 2014.05.02 21:43:00 - [597] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: You are right but not in all aspects. Roaming groups - 5-10 people max. If you know that other group you want to engage is having 40 man backup on titan , will you engage ? This will be 5:1 , and they already reshipped that they will hit you hard. When i told - drop another 70 carriers/ mother ships this is with the assumption that your enemy already deployed some forces to the battlefield and you manage to overwhelm them. You could be surprised how often we had situation where the escalation path was : 1. 1-2 capitals tackled 2. 10 more arrived , but capitals we managed to split capitals , and again tackle 1-2 of them 3. 50 more arrive 4. split 5. 50 more arrive ( and we have 40 man sub capital group) No this will not change the situation , enemy will be still escalating to save capitals , but you will be putting pressure on the isk cost of this operations. Currently bloobs have vast areas , as relocation cost are low - they will be still having those vast areas after this change , but they will have to calculate. Have all r32/r64 on the borders , or some of them , at some point are not worth defending , and at some point - are all border systems worth defending? We don't have moons, no on EVER rented them... Example. You are small lowsec group. You live in system XYZ for last 3 years , bigger bloob owns all valuable moons in this system, but they don't live here - they just login alt every 1h to check if there are no siphons. There are 3 r32 moons in the system - nothing fancy. Now if CCP will escalate cost of power projection in the proper way , let say that doping 250 man fleet will cost way more than now, or deploying carriers then current occupants of this lowsec system can do very simple thing : 1. ref those towers 2. bloob will deploy few carriers to rep them at the timer 3. tackle those carriers , and force bloob to escalate 4. when bloob arrives - disengage ( this costed them 700mil , you didn't loose any ship, or a dictor , you will probably kill some stranglers ) Return to point 1. At some point someone in this bloob will notice that bloob is burring 5b fuel / month to save 3 towers that give 1.5bil income. WOW - 1st sentence you said I was wrong then in the very next paragraph said I was right.. Your 40 man subcap fleet won't engage a 5 or 10 man roaming group for fear they have 40 more sitting on a titan? So as long as the odds are overwhelmingly in your favor, you'll fight. Please, how does that make you any different to anyone else.. Yes people will always go to save moons and until you grow some and decide it's worth the risk to take the moon for yourself, you have absolutely nothing to complain about. This extra cost to move capitals may see a few less triage caps turn up to rep pos's but will see those carriers cyno fit so when your 40 man subcap fleet turn up for the "easy" capital kill they will get a 250 man subcap fleet drop on them. This my friend is Eve Pvp. It is how it has been for years and no amount of cost increases will change that. Blob rules - He who can field the biggest blob wins the day. Any alliance that would be silly enough to drop 60 capitals on a subcap fleet to safe 2 tackled carriers - does not deserve their capitals - 2 triage capitals tackled - you drop subcaps to save not more capitals (unless a couple more triage to help with reps). And if you had 50 capitals dropped in your system and didn't bat fone, your either doing it wrong or don't know the right people. 50 capitals in 1 system to save 2 triage carriers - that's the next Asakia waiting to get called in. Screw the cost of fuel to get there, I want on those kill mails so will come. As long as I have more kill mails than loss mails, cost has nothing to do with it. Anthar; 1 thing I'm not quite clear on, you may be able to help. An alliance that has income from renters of close to a 'trillion' isk per week. How many times do you think you would have to cost them 700 mil (closer to 70 mil really) before they might stop and go - ok keep the moon, we don't want it anymore. Or, are they turning up just because they can and the isk has nothing to do with it. Anthar, I'm afraid the only way anything in nulsec is likely to change is; 1; The major coalitions implode and all out alliance level wars breaks out 2; CCP force the major coalitions to break up causing alliance level wars to break out. As neither is likely to happen (in my lifetime anyway) you need to, adapt, join a nulblob alliance or - go run missions. --- --- If the amount of pos's CCP is expecting is actually removed (I doubt it) ice prices will see little if any change. The amount of capital deployments is very very small now - increasing the cost to deploy them will only see periods between capital deployments increase. The main capitals being moved around on a daily basis are jump freighters - once again CCP pretending to give nulsec a boost with better refining - then taking it plus 50% away by increasing the cost to get the ore there.. This change to industry - forced by ccp - punishes those who have trained to fly a specific ship - which ccp encourage by lowering training requirements-- Encouraged by CCp I want to fly the biggest ships in game but because CCP wants to create and isk sink out manufacturing and research, I have to pay more to fly my capitals. No matter which way it turns out - Less pos' or not - Ice miners aren't going to start selling cheaper and lose income. A better solution might be to increase the amount of topes required for pos fuel blocks, that way pos users pay for the changes to the way pos's are used. Industry paying for changes to industry, hmmm, nah, too simple. CCP giveth and CCP, wait a few weeks, then taketh away double.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 196	Posted - 2014.05.02 22:10:00 - [598] - Quote Ravcharas wrote: sabastyian wrote: CCP Fozzie, why do you post these threads for "feedback" then chose to completely ignore any amount of feedback you receive? Give him a minute to deal with fanfest, would you? LOL, why do you think these blogs are released now. Hoping fanfest will distract players from some of the more unsavory changes being forced on us is actually quite clever marketing. Just because something is a good idea, doesn't make it the right idea. This idea, is just really really bad
Octoven Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming 367	Posted - 2014.05.03 00:40:00 - [599] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone. 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. The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals. To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback. The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing. For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk. The entire point as to why people have downgraded to smaller starbases is specifically BECAUSE of the price of isotopes. What I am reading here is, "CCP understands the market that is entirely player based is struggling, so we want to interfere with and force changes in a sandbox environment to stimlate the market. Because here at CCP we believe WE run the market, not YOU." Please for the love of god stop messing with the market, let the players dictate how price fluctuation should be run not CCP. While this will not affect large alliance or coalition blocks, it kicks the ** out of smaller groups in terms of isk. Its bad enough we have to go drop 3/4ths a bil for a plex but now we should also spend more isk for fuel because you the developers have determined we should? Stay the ** out of the market, let us handle it the way the game is designed to do. Fix something that actually is broken, how about poses and sov for starters. Ive heard, "the pos code is way to old and clusterfucked to do anything about." Yes...well so was crimewatch and CCP Masterplan and team have done brilliantly on straightening that mess out. What it really boils down to is pure laziness, "heh we dont want to bother with it...lets change a few numbers around to make it look like we are fixing something." How can you blatantly ignore fixing an issue that has plagued EVE for almost as long as its been around and has been the #1 requested item to change? I'm sorry but if this is the best CCP has to offer, then EVE my lovely friend you are indeed dying.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 19	Posted - 2014.05.03 02:30:00 - [600] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Ravcharas wrote: sabastyian wrote: CCP Fozzie, why do you post these threads for "feedback" then chose to completely ignore any amount of feedback you receive? Give him a minute to deal with fanfest, would you? LOL, why do you think these blogs are released now. Hoping fanfest will distract players from some of the more unsavory changes being forced on us is actually quite clever marketing. Just because something is a good idea, doesn't make it the right idea. This idea, is just really really bad Actually, no. Putting it out before Fanfest is ideal. It allows them to consider both the responses here as well as feedback from players directly at Fanfest. Fozzie has already replied he is reading, but doesn't have the time at the moment to respond. Give it time. He knows he's catching a wall of shite over this one from various directions.
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 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. 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.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 202	Posted - 2014.05.06 22:37:00 - [631] - 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 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. CCP obviously aren't economists or this would never have gone past the "idea" stage. There is never going to be enough capital ship movements to consume the excess topes if people just start pulling down pos's. Which is really not likely to happen the way CCP predicts - Most of the existing pos will adapt to the changes by adding compression and processing mods - New pos's will go up for compression and refining mods. The removal of standing requirements will see pos's go up and down as the need arises (mobile mining gangs and the like) --- If Devs predictions are right; 1 large pos uses 385k isotopes per week, if as CCP has predicted and hundreds of Pos's are removed due to their changes to industry then it is those who live in Nulsec will pay the cost for the oversupply of Isotopes created by CCP. If on the other hand isotope prices take a dive due to oversupply - The mining industry takes a massive hit on income, making it once again less desirable as a profession. --- Increasing the cost to move things via JF directly impacts on players living in Nul. Most JF services charge either directly to customer or by adding it to the items they put on the market. Industry in Nulsec will never and can never produce enough to keep up with supply / demand and even if it could, there is still a 50% CCP surcharge to be added to the cost of every item sold. Nulsec is not like Empire where you just fly on over to your local trade hub and pick up what you need, it is vast often unprotected space where you may need to go through numerous jump bridges and gates to get to the nearest blue station to buy what you need. Whether produced in Nulsec or brought from Jita, everything needs to be moved by JF at some point - CCP just put a 50% fuel surcharge on EVERY item in game for those living in Nulsec. (If the American president tried something like that he would soon find himself out of a job) --- CCP just added a massive nerf to Nulsec Pvp - Smaller groups will be forced to spend more time doing Pve to pay for everything. While those with isk (nulblocks) have little to worry about; - as long as shooting miners and anom runners is all you want to do. Yes it is fun going into someones renter space and shooting up a bunch of indy ships and shiny Pve boats but if it is to become the main focus of nulsec Pvp due to upcoming indy changes - the fun factor will soon diminish along with the amount of people you have to go shoot at.
Cardano Firesnake Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation 139	Posted - 2014.05.07 04:25:00 - [632] - Quote Elzon1 wrote: 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. And to come back? There will be a time where your freighters will have to warp to the Titan in his POS in Null Sec. If Hostile know you use this system for Logi an AFK cloaky will be there 24/24 until the day he will open the bubble... But of course AFK cloakers are not dangerous! Well if you stay in Low Sec the risk is lower....
Cardano Firesnake Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation 139	Posted - 2014.05.07 04:45:00 - [633] - Quote It is true that larger alliances with good logistics and people able to mine / product directly in low/null sec will feel less this change than lone guys that have to buy everything in JITA and transport it into low sec. I hope the tech 2 indus will be able to help for that. In fact transport ships with large cargo and able to pass trough gate camps is a necesity. Transport ship should pop 50km fom gates when they jump... ;-)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9872	Posted - 2014.05.07 10:43:00 - [634] - Quote Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far. I just got back to work after a bit of post-fanfest death plague recovery. I'm working through a bunch of threads to catch up on what was discussed over Fanfest and the last two days. I've fully caught up on this thread now (and I also had some excellent conversations with players at Fanfest about these issues) and we'll be considering and discussing this proposal a bit more. I also want a chance to chat with the new CSM about it once we get them all under NDA. Just a quick note about the change to the proposal surrounding isotope volume. Don't mistake my willingness to embrace a good improvement to the implementation as a sign that we have not thought through the core intent of this change. It's not unusual for excellent improvements to implementation to come from the community, as more eyes on a problem generally brings better suggestions. Where some companies would reject such an improvement just to appear stronger or more decisive, we're very proud of our willingness to embrace player ideas. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

KwarK uK Strontless Mistakes Fatal Ascension 82	Posted - 2014.05.07 11:45:00 - [635] - Quote Can we get a larger cargo bay on blops rolled into this to help them adapt to the increased consumption? Long overdue imo, especially given that some blops see less use than others due to cargo limitations. They should all have at least 1k base cargo. You should vote for KwarK for a lowsec presence on CSM8. It's a good idea. I'd do it! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=213851
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 531	Posted - 2014.05.07 16:38:00 - [636] - Quote I just thought of another side effect of changing isotope volumes -- Titans currently use their racial isotopes as fuel for their Doomsday weapons. Will doomsday weapon fuel consumption also see an increase in their tope usage commensurate with the volume reduction being planned? During the battle of B-R, tope consumption due to doomsdays became a significant factor after several hours, and many titans had to jump out to refuel. Not increasing the usage will allow them to have a longer operational period, should such a slugfest ever occur again. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Inquisitor Tyr Phantom Squad DARKNESS. 39	Posted - 2014.05.07 19:10:00 - [637] - Quote 1) Doubling the isotope useage and reducing its size by only 1/3 is effectively nerfing the range on capital ships. In essence, all you are doing is making the logistic work harder, forcing people to spend more time moving stuff around space and less time in combat. 2) The alliances are not going to stop moving fleets across the universe. In most corporations, there is 1 major player who is a hero logistics guy and supports the rest of the players with logistic support. As the need will always be there, someone will always fill the role. That person frequently gets burned out and stops playing. I've seen it happen dozens of times in several corps. If you continue to make changes that increase the work of logistics teams, you are just going to burn out your longest serving highly contributing players faster. Seriously, I've seen these guys loose marriages over eve. 3) You are effectively limiting Capital ships maximum range before running out of fuel. This helps solidify the deepest space of the major power blocs rather than leaving the core areas vulnerable. The effect is, this helps solidify the existing empires rather than shake things up; and a shake up is what everyone in nullsec keeps screaming for. 4) You overestimate the affect the slots changes will have on POS usage. The majority of towers are in nullsec, and the majority of those towers are used for moon material extraction and reactions. Very few use them for manufacturing, and labs are the exception and not the rule. You will definitely see less towers in empire; but increasing the cost of running them is certainly not going to cause more people to set them up. Its a free market economy, leave the players to deal with the relative prices of things. Every time you get involved in the economy (think drone mineral nerf, etc) you cause ramifications that you aren't considering (the major imbalance it created on nullsec vs highsec ore isk/hour ratios, which you later patched by buffing nullsec ores) because the game is too complex to see all ends. A preemptive move on something that might not happen isn't going to help. Introduce the fuel change in a later patch - take a look and see what happens with the tope market after the slot changes first. In the mean time, market speculation is driving tope prices sky high. Youll have to wait a couple months for the reserves to dwindle before you can look closely at it.
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 533	Posted - 2014.05.07 19:19:00 - [638] - Quote Inquisitor Tyr wrote: 1) Doubling the isotope useage and reducing its size by only 1/3 is effectively nerfing the range on capital ships. In essence, all you are doing is making the logistic work harder, forcing people to spend more time moving stuff around space and less time in combat. Your math is wrong. The math is such that the range on capital ships on a full tank of isotopes does not change. Before, isotopes were 0.15 m^3. After, isotopes are 0.10 m^3. This is a 33% decrease in volume. Before, a jump takes 1000 topes. The volume is 0.15 m^3 per tope. The total volume of isotopes consumed is 150 m^3. After, the same jump takes 1500 topes. The volume is 0.1 m^3 per tope. The total volume of isotopes consumed is 150 m^3. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 396	Posted - 2014.05.08 11:44:00 - [639] - Quote Moving goods in JF will be cheaper , if this JF will cargo expanding rigs. Take into consideration that when you put T2 Rigs , it can go beyond 500k m3 from the current 350k3. What more all super capitals should have fuel consumption increased , and based on their mass Currently : (all V) Thanathos / Nyx / Erberus jumping 1Ly consumes around 500 isotopes. Their base mass is : Thanathos: 1,163,250,000 kg ; ~0.43 isotope per 1000t/LY Nyx: 1,615,625,000 kg ; ~0.31 isotope per 1000t/LY Erebus: 2,379,370,000 kg ; ~0.21 isotope per tone/LY So the bigger ship the less isotopes needed to move it. If we just assume that we keep result from thanathos and scale it up for this 1 lY: Then ships will burn: Nyx: ~694 isotopers Erebus: ~1023 isotopes Still from my perspective, the bigger ship, the more fuel it should use so lets use safely 20% more of fuel consumption based on class, and rounding it down to keep calculation simple: Carriers/dreads : ~ 500 isotopes per LY Motherships : ~ 800 isotopes per LY Titans : ~ 1400 isotopes per LY This is more realistic, the bigger ship, the bigger mass - the more fuel you have to use it to move id across the space. Now lets apply 50% more fuel Carriers/dreads : ~ 750 isotopes per LY Motherships : ~ 1200 isotopes per LY Titans : ~ 2100 isotopes per LY Of course in case of the Supercarriers and titans , small tweak to fuel bays will be needed. This way isotopes will be burned, and we will not have supercapital fleets roaming from one edge of the eve to another , few times a day. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
Querns GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation 543	Posted - 2014.05.08 14:58:00 - [640] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Moving goods in JF will be cheaper , if this JF will cargo expanding rigs. This is predicated on JFs and freighters not taking a cargo bay nerf to partially or completely compensate for the rigs, which I feel is extremely likely (but as of yet unconfirmed.) This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Soldarius Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore 673	Posted - 2014.05.08 15:07:00 - [641] - Quote Rayana Darine wrote: This sounds like Obamacare already. As opposed to the no care you would get from a conservative gov't because too expensive can't afford it? Stop reading the tabloids. GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥ -Grath Telkin, 2014.
Elzon1 Shadow Boys Corp 178	Posted - 2014.05.09 08:21:00 - [642] - Quote Cardano Firesnake wrote: And to come back? There will be a time where your freighters will have to warp to the Titan in his POS in Null Sec. If Hostile know you use this system for Logi an AFK cloaky will be there 24/24 until the day he will open the bubble... But of course AFK cloakers are not dangerous! Well if you stay in Low Sec the risk is lower.... There is always the option of having a defense fleet when doing larger logistics ops. Logistic ops of this nature are on the rarer side as people usually like to transport their things by way of carrier in between nullsec systems. Carriers have a greater tank and still have good range, but of course they aren't the most isk efficient means of doing so. In terms of day to day operations most people would use carriers or jump freighters to move thing around in nullsec itself. My main point is that the titan based jump portal is a bit too efficient compared to all other methods transport in nullsec.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 396	Posted - 2014.05.09 13:35:00 - [643] - Quote Linking mass of the ship to fuel consumption to the ship mass will also be nice. Shield ships burning less fuel than armor ones. Moving titan from one system to another should burn more fuel than using a carrier , that is way, way , way more smaller. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
Rommiee Mercury Inc. 701	Posted - 2014.05.09 22:00:00 - [644] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Where some companies would reject such an improvement just to appear stronger or more decisive, we're very proud of our willingness to embrace player ideas. Excellent news....so you will not be going ahead with this dumb idea then ?
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 574	Posted - 2014.05.09 22:31:00 - [645] - Quote Kern Walzky wrote: 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 !!! I think the change in isotope size was meant to counteract that. So with the new values your traveling range is the same as before.
Darin Vanar Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 15	Posted - 2014.05.10 08:02:00 - [646] - Quote Or... You could fix POSes to still be viable in highsec this expansion, and not have to frontload the cost to other parties, in hopes of not completely destroying the ice market. Just saying.. Because you know when you finally do find a reason for POSes to be maintained in highsec 24/7 like they are now, you are not going to roll back these changes and these parties will be stuck with the bill, forever.
Arkon Olacar Imperial Guardians Spaceship Samurai 344	Posted - 2014.05.11 18:10:00 - [647] - Quote Hey if Riot could poach Fozzie that would be really ***** appreciated Ideally before he comes up with more **** ** like this Warping to zero
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 771	Posted - 2014.05.11 18:31:00 - [648] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Linking mass of the ship to fuel consumption to the ship mass will also be nice. Shield ships burning less fuel than armor ones. Moving titan from one system to another should burn more fuel than using a carrier , that is way, way , way more smaller. It's 18% lighter. 1.1bn vs 1.3 bn Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Elequent-Lady Dolorous Marchwarden 3	Posted - 2014.05.11 19:31:00 - [649] - Quote Can we have fuel conservation rigs please? Yes, the "e" was intentional.-á
Catherine Laartii State Protectorate Caldari State 173	Posted - 2014.05.11 20:36:00 - [650] - Quote After stepping back and reviewing the intention behind most of these dev posts about coming industry changes, I believe most of these are focused on encouraging smaller grass roots indy corps to help flourish a little more in high and low to provide better market variety and distribution. Whether or not this actually will achieve that goal remains to be seen, since I'm withholding judgement until the freighter/JF thread gets posted.
HuGo87 Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 0	Posted - 2014.05.12 06:37:00 - [651] - Quote If the idea is to avoid huge fleets being moved that often (as initially described) then: Jump freighters should be unaffected. They're not part of "huge fleets", and this change would affect then negatively a lot. If would negatively affect lowsec dwellers and FW as well. Increase the fuel cost those cyno generator arrays, which tend to be used more by larger alliances AFAIK. Increase the fuel cost of larger capitals (eg: titans) more than that of the smaller ones (carriers? dreads?
sabastyian Death By Design Did he say Jump 22	Posted - 2014.05.12 15:52:00 - [652] - Quote So with the next expansion looming with terrible ideas such as this and mountains of player feedback, have the devs even responded or looked at these threads since posting them, picking one thing and going "we used feedback, see?" If not, why bother posting these threads?

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9969	Posted - 2014.05.12 18:40:00 - [653] - Quote Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Cirius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Cirius on July 22nd. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/


CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 9969	Posted - 2014.05.12 18:40:00 - [654] - Quote Querns wrote: I just thought of another side effect of changing isotope volumes -- Titans currently use their racial isotopes as fuel for their Doomsday weapons. Will doomsday weapon fuel consumption also see an increase in their tope usage commensurate with the volume reduction being planned? During the battle of B-R, tope consumption due to doomsdays became a significant factor after several hours, and many titans had to jump out to refuel. Not increasing the usage will allow them to have a longer operational period, should such a slugfest ever occur again. We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Batolemaeus Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 54	Posted - 2014.05.12 18:57:00 - [655] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Cirius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Cirius on July 22nd. I'd suggest you take a wait and see approach to isotope production and consumption post industry expansion release anyway. You are essentially doing premature optimization. You are trying to counteract something based on a hypothesis that might turn out to be completely false, while several dozen variables change at the same time. If your hypothesis is right, you can react in a timely manner since you have the data to see through speculative price bubbles and the processes to react timely. If you are wrong, the worst case scenario is demand outstripping the hard capped production capabilities of empire space and creating a t2 industry crash and heavy decrease in QOL in all space that depends on the empire lifeline for supplies. Have a look at the stocks in jita. Nitrogen will sell out FAST. And there is no capability for local production for alliances beyond the racial fuel type while game balance for capitals heavily favors a few distinct doctrines. Basically, if I am wrong and isotope consumption does decrease a lot, the worst that happens is a decrease in fuel costs spurring industry activity and lowering prices in 0.0 market hubs and for t2 items in empire, while some ice miners transition to mining ore. If you are wrong, prices for fuel could spiral out of control due to limited supply ever since the ice belt change, which will ripple though and make deep 0.0 even more of a shithole than it is now and raising prices for t2 gear, the established standard for being competitive in pvp.
PinkKnife Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 499	Posted - 2014.05.12 19:58:00 - [656] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd i And so the feature creep begins.
Petrus Blackshell Derelict Rifter Enterprise 3145	Posted - 2014.05.12 20:01:00 - [657] - Quote PinkKnife wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd i And so the feature creep begins. That's not what feature creep means. Rifterlings - newbie-friendly swashbuckling corp ("weflyrifters" in-game channel). Join today! www.rifterlings.com Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com
Shivanthar Thrilling Institution of TaTas Permanent Mental Syndrome 70	Posted - 2014.05.13 06:02:00 - [658] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: :Edit: ... We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss ... :Edit: Yay! Marauders that can jump finally! There is ship, there is cargo, you guys really giving more and more tools for Marauders and encouraging them to go low-null every other thay Btw, why only Kronos?
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 3595	Posted - 2014.05.13 06:11:00 - [659] - Quote Shivanthar wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: :Edit: ... We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss ... :Edit: Yay! Marauders that can jump finally! There is the ship, there is the cargo space more than enough. You guys really giving more and more tools for Marauders and encouraging them to go low-null every other thay Btw, why only Kronos? () /doublefacepalm
Edwin McAlister Interstellar Engineering and Electronics INC 25	Posted - 2014.05.13 07:00:00 - [660] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: : aThe goals of this change are: [list] 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. As an industrialist, and discussion with ffriends, i feel i must disagree with this... The proposed changes with industry, several of us that had small towers, will be upgradeing those towers to mediums (or larges).. the need to defend our assets being the primary reason, the cost of the increased fuel requirement will just be passed on to the buyer of the end product / goods.
Octoven Phoenix Productions Headshot Gaming 381	Posted - 2014.05.13 07:54:00 - [661] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Crius on July 22nd. Given the massive feedback against this idea, I would suggest postponing the idea completely until the fall. Give the markets time to settle down from all the industry changes. I mean the fact that you are opening POSes up in 0.8-1.0 as well as without standings will already dramatically affect the isotope market. It may in fact be the increase in usage you were looking for. If you try to release this at the same time as industry changes I can only suspect it to be detrimental to everyone and the game as a whole.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 405	Posted - 2014.05.13 07:57:00 - [662] - Quote Moterships and titan should burn more fuel than Carrier or dread. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
Mournful Conciousness Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 780	Posted - 2014.05.13 08:26:00 - [663] - Quote Octoven wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Crius on July 22nd. Given the massive feedback against this idea, I would suggest postponing the idea completely until the fall. Give the markets time to settle down from all the industry changes. I mean the fact that you are opening POSes up in 0.8-1.0 as well as without standings will already dramatically affect the isotope market. It may in fact be the increase in usage you were looking for. If you try to release this at the same time as industry changes I can only suspect it to be detrimental to everyone and the game as a whole. Or... We could just embrace the changes, meeting the challenges head on. Leave the comfort of familiarity for the thrill of discovery... Or are we all wearing slippers in our spaceships now? Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".
Shivanthar Thrilling Institution of TaTas Permanent Mental Syndrome 70	Posted - 2014.05.13 11:07:00 - [664] - Quote Tau Cabalander wrote: Shivanthar wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: :Edit: ... We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss ... :Edit: Yay! Marauders that can jump finally! There is the ship, there is the cargo space more than enough. You guys really giving more and more tools for Marauders and encouraging them to go low-null every other thay Btw, why only Kronos? () /doublefacepalm LMAO
Luxotor Imploding Turtles Rising in Outerspace Gravity 53	Posted - 2014.05.13 14:51:00 - [665] - Quote Elequent-Lady Dolorous wrote: Can we have fuel conservation rigs please? I'd rather have a slot 9 navigation implant that reduces jump fuel consumption by 1/3/5/8%. THE NIGHT IS DARK AND FULL OF TERRORS!
Ama Zing Black Scorpions Inc Circle-Of-Two 19	Posted - 2014.05.13 16:57:00 - [666] - Quote Hey Guys, I am still missing the point, why CCP interacts with the market - CCP should be neutral, as far as it can be. There is no need to nerf jump drives ..... There is no need to push the industrialst into ice mining .... and the worst thing is that example you gave us, with a jump freighter, paying +25 mio for that route .... Do you think, JF pilots earn to much cash with their services? I really don't get it.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 30	Posted - 2014.05.13 18:02:00 - [667] - Quote Ama Zing wrote: Hey Guys, I am still missing the point, why CCP interacts with the market - CCP should be neutral, as far as it can be. There is no need to nerf jump drives ..... There is no need to push the industrialst into ice mining .... and the worst thing is that example you gave us, with a jump freighter, paying +25 mio for that route .... Do you think, JF pilots earn to much cash with their services? I really don't get it. Charge more. People who need your JF service will still need it. CCP is forced to interact with the market (sometimes) because they make changes elsewhere that affect the market. Thus they are not neutral unless they stop making changes altogether. In this case though, they are jumping the gun a little. At least based on their given reason behind the change. I suppose they could have just said: we are increasing the consumption by 50% because we want to. End of story. It's their game they can make changes. But since they gave a reason, many of the counters have been based on that reason.
Anthar Thebess REPUBLIKA ORLA C0VEN 405	Posted - 2014.05.13 18:37:00 - [668] - Quote What we need are supercapital ships burning 3-4 times more than a carrier. Summer 2014 - Carrier Split
Arkon Olacar Imperial Guardians Spaceship Samurai 345	Posted - 2014.05.13 22:46:00 - [669] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Crius on July 22nd. Push this change back to the release after Crius. Whats the point in moving to a six week rolling set of releases if you are still going to try and cram too much crap into one release? Wait and see what affect the industry changes actually have on the market. Most of the industry guys I've spoken to will be increasing their fuel consumption as a result of the changes, not decreasing it. If the prices start to rise significantly, then follow through with this change. If they don't (and I doubt they will), then chalk this one up to a bad decision that you nearly inflicted on the playerbase. Warping to zero
Rann Skir Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2014.05.13 23:05:00 - [670] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Querns wrote: I just thought of another side effect of changing isotope volumes -- Titans currently use their racial isotopes as fuel for their Doomsday weapons. Will doomsday weapon fuel consumption also see an increase in their tope usage commensurate with the volume reduction being planned? During the battle of B-R, tope consumption due to doomsdays became a significant factor after several hours, and many titans had to jump out to refuel. Not increasing the usage will allow them to have a longer operational period, should such a slugfest ever occur again. We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. I think it's a decent balancing factor that they can't just endlessly spam doomsdays over the span of a large fights. Supers have 'ammo' too in the form of destructible fighters/fighter bombers, and subcaps consume ammo and drones in large quantities as well.
Dirk MacGirk Specter Syndicate Tactical Narcotics Team 32	Posted - 2014.05.13 23:25:00 - [671] - Quote Rann Skir wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Querns wrote: I just thought of another side effect of changing isotope volumes -- Titans currently use their racial isotopes as fuel for their Doomsday weapons. Will doomsday weapon fuel consumption also see an increase in their tope usage commensurate with the volume reduction being planned? During the battle of B-R, tope consumption due to doomsdays became a significant factor after several hours, and many titans had to jump out to refuel. Not increasing the usage will allow them to have a longer operational period, should such a slugfest ever occur again. We will be giving doomsday isotope consumption some thought and bringing it up with the CSM, thanks. I think it's a decent balancing factor that they can't just endlessly spam doomsdays over the span of a large fights. Supers have 'ammo' too in the form of destructible fighters/fighter bombers, and subcaps consume ammo and drones in large quantities as well. Wait - are people crying that more supers would have gotten the big blast? I thought you peeps cheer everytime a titan dies. More fuel = more dead supers. If anything, reduce their consumption
HuGo87 Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 6	Posted - 2014.05.14 05:49:00 - [672] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: [quote=Ama Zing]Hey Guys, Charge more. People who need your JF service will still need it. I freight for myself. I don't want to waste MORE ISK just moving ships. I spend ISK on ships to PvP, not to haul them.
Mouchette Chevaliers de la Croix Du Sud 4	Posted - 2014.05.16 16:43:00 - [673] - Quote 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals = more expense for players = more money for ... Find the error ?
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 218	Posted - 2014.05.16 22:16:00 - [674] - Quote Luxotor wrote: Elequent-Lady Dolorous wrote: Can we have fuel conservation rigs please? I'd rather have a slot 9 navigation implant that reduces jump fuel consumption by 1/3/5/8%. Why? Having to spend even more isk to use some of the most expensive ships in game - For what to get back 8% of a 50% increase? I've already trained Jump Fuel Conservation 5. Why should I pay more because Devs cut ice miners income (maybe). Conversation between, drunk or just bored Devs after a staff party - Dev 1 says; I have an idea that will keep management thinking we are improving the game; We'll completely change the way industry gets carried out - and charge Capital ship pilots for it. Dev 2 says; I have a plan for advertising; Next run of ads for Eve - Latest innovations for our popular sandbox game. Our Devs will actively seek out and find any mechanic in game that is not broken, tamper with it and add what they "think" players will see as better functionality. Then so no-one is left out of Devs unnecessary over complication and increased cost of things. We will add additional costs to a totally unrelated section of players (capital pilots), to subsidize a group of players (ice miners) who had their income cut by Devs "balancing" of a mechanic (industry). We pride ourselves on over complicated menus, role and title management interfaces, straight out of your worst nightmare. A 3rd Dev joins them; How about we introduce ToolTips that take away the previous functionality of tooltips and make them, well , basically horrible and useless. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care..
Nys Cron Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 20	Posted - 2014.05.17 18:26:00 - [675] - Quote As someone who doesn't have all their fuel paid for by Corp/Alliance I will be even more hesitant to jump capitals around and thus provide less opportunity for interesting content. Is this the intention behind the change?
PotatoOverdose Handsome Millionaire Playboys 1815	Posted - 2014.05.17 22:55:00 - [676] - Quote Why does it cost as much to jump a Thanatos, Nyx, and Erebus the same distance? That's where you should look into increasing "demand" for topes.
Asuka Solo Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises 2670	Posted - 2014.05.19 13:11:00 - [677] - Quote BadAssMcKill wrote: Jesus no Stop it This. Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Gaijin Lanis Astral Silence Surely You're Joking 16	Posted - 2014.05.19 20:42:00 - [678] - Quote Just hopping in to let everyone at CCP know the change worked! Isk/hr of ice mining has been increasing steadily since this change was applied! As, per fozzie's predictions, the increased usage has increased demand of the various isotopes and maintained the viability of ice mining! Wait, hold on, the change hasn't been applied yet. Meaning just talking about doing this has already caused isotope prices to skyrocket. Meaning once the change actually hits, prices will simply balloon further. Like others have mentioned in this thread, the supply of ice is essentially fixed. So steadily increasing demand of a commodity with a fixed supply means it will quickly price itself out of the range of everyone other than the power blocs.
Asuka Solo Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises 2671	Posted - 2014.05.20 06:38:00 - [679] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: Just hopping in to let everyone at CCP know the change worked! Isk/hr of ice mining has been increasing steadily since this change was applied! As, per fozzie's predictions, the increased usage has increased demand of the various isotopes and maintained the viability of ice mining! Wait, hold on, the change hasn't been applied yet. Meaning just talking about doing this has already caused isotope prices to skyrocket. Meaning once the change actually hits, prices will simply balloon further. Like others have mentioned in this thread, the supply of ice is essentially fixed. So steadily increasing demand of a commodity with a fixed supply means it will quickly price itself out of the range of everyone other than the power blocs. The power blocs, of course, will be unaffected because they have no choice but to maintain their levels of projection or lose their assets. Given the change has not yet been applied, what your seeing now is market speculation leading up to it. Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Anthar Thebess 423	Posted - 2014.05.20 07:33:00 - [680] - Quote PotatoOverdose wrote: Why does it cost as much to jump a Thanatos, Nyx, and Erebus the same distance? That's where you should look into increasing "demand" for topes. I posted the same. There is no difference on the ship size so jumping titan , mothership or a carrier cost the same amount fuel. EVE SHIP SIZE When you compare the size of those ships and use carrier fuel usage as a base then: - mothership (based on the model size ) should burn at least 4 times more fuel. - Titan (again ) should burn at least 10 or more times more than a motherships. You think that those numbers are insane. Well , yes , but take into consideration strategic application of those ships. Currently the same cost in fuel is to drop carrier, mothership or titan. Compare EHP..... If those scaling could be applied then blobs will think where to place their ships to make the best use of them. Next B-R will also be more likely to happen. Currently , few times a week people save their super capitals, because quickly enough allied supercapital force arrives. After this change those ships will be more spread out. So this will mean more time needed for other people to come, especially tat reinforcements will be arriving all the time for both sides. Summer: Moon Mining Changes
Andrea Keuvo Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 261	Posted - 2014.05.20 12:34:00 - [681] - Quote Question - since you have switched to these short development cycles why are you implementing this change now to fix a problem that doesn't exist yet? Wouldn't the logical thing to do be to see if the changes create an issue in the isotope market and if changes are needed implement them 1 month later in the next patch?
Dave Stark 5940	Posted - 2014.05.20 19:55:00 - [682] - Quote https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4619107#post4619107
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 10009	Posted - 2014.05.21 04:54:00 - [683] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: Just hopping in to let everyone at CCP know the change worked! Isk/hr of ice mining has been increasing steadily since this change was applied! As, per fozzie's predictions, the increased usage has increased demand of the various isotopes and maintained the viability of ice mining! Wait, hold on, the change hasn't been applied yet. Meaning just talking about doing this has already caused isotope prices to skyrocket. Meaning once the change actually hits, prices will simply balloon further. Like others have mentioned in this thread, the supply of ice is essentially fixed. So steadily increasing demand of a commodity with a fixed supply means it will quickly price itself out of the range of everyone other than the power blocs. The power blocs, of course, will be unaffected because they have no choice but to maintain their levels of projection or lose their assets. This change does not exist in a vacuum. You cannot assume that isotope and ice prices are going to go up just because jump drive isotope consumption will. "Pretty much all 14 of the CSM were in favor of a drone assign nerf for OBVIOUS gameplay reasons" - Sala Cameron
Gaijin Lanis Astral Silence Surely You're Joking 16	Posted - 2014.05.21 23:31:00 - [684] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: Just hopping in to let everyone at CCP know the change worked! Isk/hr of ice mining has been increasing steadily since this change was applied! As, per fozzie's predictions, the increased usage has increased demand of the various isotopes and maintained the viability of ice mining! Wait, hold on, the change hasn't been applied yet. Meaning just talking about doing this has already caused isotope prices to skyrocket. Meaning once the change actually hits, prices will simply balloon further. Like others have mentioned in this thread, the supply of ice is essentially fixed. So steadily increasing demand of a commodity with a fixed supply means it will quickly price itself out of the range of everyone other than the power blocs. The power blocs, of course, will be unaffected because they have no choice but to maintain their levels of projection or lose their assets. This change does not exist in a vacuum. You cannot assume that isotope and ice prices are going to go up just because jump drive isotope consumption will. The prices have already increased. As the potential for more expensive isotopes due to the limited nature of isotope supply created instant demand for isotopes of non-insane prices. The assumption there will be potentially lower number of smaller controls towers (due to most control towers being basically useless after the sloticide) is speculative at best, but closer to completely faulty. As others have mentioned in all the threads surrounding this issue, hisec will still be the best place to manufacture, as nullsec will be even worse than it is now (due to the removal of mineral compression and the increase in jump fuel costs) and nothing beats having your towers protected by concord and 24 hours warning on it lifting. To say, import/export is the lifeblood of a functional economy, and Crius looks to be centered around shooting import/export in the face.
Jason Pareka Hedion University Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2014.05.22 16:57:00 - [685] - Quote So BLOP fleets now become cost ineffective as well as largely impractical? any thought on at least not increasing the cost per m3 for the covert jump portal?
Allison A'vani North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 131	Posted - 2014.05.22 17:24:00 - [686] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: Just hopping in to let everyone at CCP know the change worked! Isk/hr of ice mining has been increasing steadily since this change was applied! As, per fozzie's predictions, the increased usage has increased demand of the various isotopes and maintained the viability of ice mining! Wait, hold on, the change hasn't been applied yet. Meaning just talking about doing this has already caused isotope prices to skyrocket. Meaning once the change actually hits, prices will simply balloon further. Like others have mentioned in this thread, the supply of ice is essentially fixed. So steadily increasing demand of a commodity with a fixed supply means it will quickly price itself out of the range of everyone other than the power blocs. The power blocs, of course, will be unaffected because they have no choice but to maintain their levels of projection or lose their assets. This change does not exist in a vacuum. You cannot assume that isotope and ice prices are going to go up just because jump drive isotope consumption will. The prices have already increased. As the potential for more expensive isotopes due to the limited nature of isotope supply created instant demand for isotopes of non-insane prices. The assumption there will be potentially lower number of smaller controls towers (due to most control towers being basically useless after the sloticide) is speculative at best, but closer to completely faulty. As others have mentioned in all the threads surrounding this issue, hisec will still be the best place to manufacture, as nullsec will be even worse than it is now (due to the removal of mineral compression and the increase in jump fuel costs) and nothing beats having your towers protected by concord and 24 hours warning on it lifting. To say, import/export is the lifeblood of a functional economy, and Crius looks to be centered around shooting import/export in the face. Pretty much this. I have no idea how anyone at CCP thinks that these changes at all benefit Null sec production. Every one of the proposed changes (except the outpost buff) is a nurf to null sec production. No one is going to risk having their BPOs in a POS in Low Sec or 0.0. The risk is just far too high (you don't keep gold bricks on your porch and just put a fence around it, that is extremely dumb). Coupled with the proposed fuel consumption increases PLUS the nurf to compression. There is zero reason to even bother producing anything (other than capitals) in Low/Null. No one takes mining in Null seriously at all either. If your system has any industry upgrades at all then you are instantly the target of every fleet for 3 regions in every direction.
Allison A'vani North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion 131	Posted - 2014.05.22 17:32:00 - [687] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: PotatoOverdose wrote: Why does it cost as much to jump a Thanatos, Nyx, and Erebus the same distance? That's where you should look into increasing "demand" for topes. I posted the same. There is no difference on the ship size so jumping titan , mothership or a carrier cost the same amount fuel. EVE SHIP SIZE When you compare the size of those ships and use carrier fuel usage as a base then: - mothership (based on the model size ) should burn at least 4 times more fuel. - Titan (again ) should burn at least 10 or more times more than a motherships. You think that those numbers are insane. Well , yes , but take into consideration strategic application of those ships. Currently the same cost in fuel is to drop carrier, mothership or titan. Compare EHP..... If those scaling could be applied then blobs will think where to place their ships to make the best use of them. Next B-R will also be more likely to happen. Currently , few times a week people save their super capitals, because quickly enough allied supercapital force arrives. After this change those ships will be more spread out. So this will mean more time needed for other people to come, especially tat reinforcements will be arriving all the time for both sides. Except for the fact that it would have zero impact at all. All the large null blocks can just shrug off that charge. Isotopes are a very minor cost compared to other expenses such as: POS Fuel Blocks, Solv Bills, Super Cap subsidies and Ship Reimbursement. Let us not forget what is historically one of the biggest expenses for Alliances every year, the Alliance Tournament. There will be no change in usages of capitals nor supers nor JF. The only limiting time factor, as always, has and will be jump range and moving cynos.
Anthar Thebess 469	Posted - 2014.05.26 13:07:00 - [688] - Quote Allison A'vani wrote: Except for the fact that it would have zero impact at all. All the large null blocks can just shrug off that charge. Isotopes are a very minor cost compared to other expenses such as: POS Fuel Blocks, Solv Bills, Super Cap subsidies and Ship Reimbursement. Let us not forget what is historically one of the biggest expenses for Alliances every year, the Alliance Tournament. There will be no change in usages of capitals nor supers nor JF. The only limiting time factor, as always, has and will be jump range and moving cynos. So we can , apply this change? If you say that this will not change any thing - then lets make EVE more REAL!. I didn't expect that someone from PL will support my idea. Jump Fuel Usage Based on Ship Size Interdiction Siphon Unit
Lahingingel KolliURG 0	Posted - 2014.05.29 10:59:00 - [689] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: The prices have already increased. As the potential for more expensive isotopes due to the limited nature of isotope supply created instant demand for isotopes of non-insane prices. The assumption there will be potentially lower number of smaller controls towers (due to most control towers being basically useless after the sloticide) is speculative at best, but closer to completely faulty. As others have mentioned in all the threads surrounding this issue, hisec will still be the best place to manufacture, as nullsec will be even worse than it is now (due to the removal of mineral compression and the increase in jump fuel costs) and nothing beats having your towers protected by concord and 24 hours warning on it lifting. To say, import/export is the lifeblood of a functional economy, and Crius looks to be centered around shooting import/export in the face. I, for one, expect to see significant drop in empire POS tower numbers. Ofc this will affect most caldari (as armor cap fleets are still the main thing and caldari towers were mostly used in hi sec R&D). The reason why I believe so is (1) added hassle of juggling with materials for any semi-serious manufacturing op. (2) the new POS labs are just screaming "BPO in here" so I do not expect anyone to put anything other than some ammo and rig prints in there and frankly, POS is not quite worth it running for just the ammo and rig print research. (3) the lack of slots was limiting factor so far, with the slot limits gone and PLEX prices as they are you can almost compensate for the POS effectivity difference by having an extra account of R&D alts (for approx the same price as fuel for large tower) (33 extra jobs) - AND you can lock down your BPO's in corp hangar (with the way POS roles work good luck maintaining any kind of security). (4) Large tower is not any more secure than a small tower - all it takes is just a little more time and if properly gunned then couple more logi. It is trivial to wardec with 1 man corp and then corp-hop for the kill so even with large tower you will need to evacuate prints for every random wardec you get or you will lose your library rather sooner than later. So in a nutshell I do not expect to see hi sec POS'es used for industry related tasks other than some casual people and select few being in a single corp with all their alts assuming that they can pull the crap out before wardec goes active.
Gaijin Lanis Surely You're Joking 28	Posted - 2014.05.29 14:54:00 - [690] - Quote Lahingingel wrote: I, for one, expect to see significant drop in empire POS tower numbers. Ofc this will affect most caldari (as armor cap fleets are still the main thing and caldari towers were mostly used in hi sec R&D). The reason why I believe so is (1) added hassle of juggling with materials for any semi-serious manufacturing op. (2) the new POS labs are just screaming "BPO in here" so I do not expect anyone to put anything other than some ammo and rig prints in there and frankly, POS is not quite worth it running for just the ammo and rig print research. (3) the lack of slots was limiting factor so far, with the slot limits gone and PLEX prices as they are you can almost compensate for the POS effectivity difference by having an extra account of R&D alts (for approx the same price as fuel for large tower) (33 extra jobs) - AND you can lock down your BPO's in corp hangar (with the way POS roles work good luck maintaining any kind of security). (4) Large tower is not any more secure than a small tower - all it takes is just a little more time and if properly gunned then couple more logi. It is trivial to wardec with 1 man corp and then corp-hop for the kill so even with large tower you will need to evacuate prints for every random wardec you get or you will lose your library rather sooner than later. So in a nutshell I do not expect to see hi sec POS'es used for industry related tasks other than some casual people and select few being in a single corp with all their alts assuming that they can pull the crap out before wardec goes active. You are correct. The number of towers used exclusively for research is going to drop significantly. The problem is the manufacturing and reprocessing changes. CCP is going to make it so reprocessing arrays have the highest reprocessing yield short of a fully skilled character at a fully upgraded minmatar outpost while simultaneously cutting all other reprocessing yields in NPC stations so all of hisec will have worse yeilds than low, low worse yields than null, etc. Then they're adding a 2% material reduction to manufacturing arrays. Then, on top of everything, they're bumping import/export costs, removing mineral compression, and much more! Did I mention the reprocessing arrays also don't require any skills beyond anchoring? So, basically, hisec POSs are going to become the primary means of production. As concord protection and 24 hour warning on it lifting, on top of all the other fun quirks of Crius, kinda trumps all other concerns. But this is all somewhat moot. They're adding fuel conservation modules (not rigs) on top of nerfing import/export into the ground. So, if anything, ice is going to crash hard no matter what. But Crius looks like its going to crash the entire market as well. So fun times. The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
De'Veldrin Saint's Industries Brothers of Tangra 2096	Posted - 2014.05.29 17:02:00 - [691] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: As concord protection and 24 hour warning on it lifting, on top of all the other fun quirks of Crius, kinda trumps all other concerns. Details on this bit? GÇ£SandboxGÇ¥ does not mean that you will succeed at anything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at. One of the largest obstacles in the way of your success is other players.
Gaijin Lanis Surely You're Joking 30	Posted - 2014.05.30 04:58:00 - [692] - Quote De'Veldrin wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: As concord protection and 24 hour warning on it lifting, on top of all the other fun quirks of Crius, kinda trumps all other concerns. Details on this bit? Unless they are changing or have changed it, CONCORD will defend player owned structures in hisec from attack unless a war is declared. War declarations take 24 hours to go active. The More You Know The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
Jaari Val'Dara Wormbro Ocularis Inferno 89	Posted - 2014.05.30 09:39:00 - [693] - Quote I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3.
Joraa Starkmanir Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.05.30 09:46:00 - [694] - Quote Jaari Val'Dara wrote: I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3. Isnt volume changed so you can jump just as long with full fuelbay as before, just at a higher cost?
Carniflex StarHunt Mordus Angels 218	Posted - 2014.05.30 09:52:00 - [695] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: De'Veldrin wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: As concord protection and 24 hour warning on it lifting, on top of all the other fun quirks of Crius, kinda trumps all other concerns. Details on this bit? Unless they are changing or have changed it, CONCORD will defend player owned structures in hisec from attack unless a war is declared. War declarations take 24 hours to go active. The More You Know I believe he might be thinking of the option ot (perhaps) lift CONCORD protection from offline towers in hi-sec. Which was, I believe, once mentioned during some fan-fest roundtable as one of the options under consideration. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Kagura Nikon Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 1396	Posted - 2014.05.30 10:14:00 - [696] - Quote Jaari Val'Dara wrote: I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3. They probably already have plans fro black ops changes on the tiercide pass, so might be irrelevant to make these adjustments now. The only ships still m,issing from tiercide are Recons, T3, Black ops and capitals if memory serves me right. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!"
De'Veldrin Saint's Industries Brothers of Tangra 2098	Posted - 2014.05.30 11:30:00 - [697] - Quote Carniflex wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: De'Veldrin wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: As concord protection and 24 hour warning on it lifting, on top of all the other fun quirks of Crius, kinda trumps all other concerns. Details on this bit? Unless they are changing or have changed it, CONCORD will defend player owned structures in hisec from attack unless a war is declared. War declarations take 24 hours to go active. The More You Know I believe he might be thinking of the option ot (perhaps) lift CONCORD protection from offline towers in hi-sec. Which was, I believe, once mentioned during some fan-fest roundtable as one of the options under consideration. Thanks. I had not heard that. GÇ£SandboxGÇ¥ does not mean that you will succeed at anything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at. One of the largest obstacles in the way of your success is other players.
De'Veldrin Saint's Industries Brothers of Tangra 2098	Posted - 2014.05.30 11:32:00 - [698] - Quote Joraa Starkmanir wrote: Jaari Val'Dara wrote: I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3. Isnt volume changed so you can jump just as long with full fuelbay as before, just at a higher cost? Yes, they are reducing the volume of the fuel. I haven't run the math to know if the ranges will be exactly the same, but they should be close. GÇ£SandboxGÇ¥ does not mean that you will succeed at anything you attempt; it means you can attempt anything you want to succeed at. One of the largest obstacles in the way of your success is other players.
Joraa Starkmanir Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.05.30 11:46:00 - [699] - Quote De'Veldrin wrote: Joraa Starkmanir wrote: Jaari Val'Dara wrote: I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3. Isnt volume changed so you can jump just as long with full fuelbay as before, just at a higher cost? Yes, they are reducing the volume of the fuel. I haven't run the math to know if the ranges will be exactly the same, but they should be close. +50% = 150% reduced to 2/3 = 100% or the exact same as before.
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 728	Posted - 2014.06.04 02:32:00 - [700] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Jaari Val'Dara wrote: I feel obliged to complain. Black ops has insanely small fuel bay, increasing fuel costs, but not decreasing fuel volume enough will make black ops fleets even less viable. If you know what's good for eve, buff black ops fuel bay, to at least 3 or 4 thousand m^3. They probably already have plans fro black ops changes on the tiercide pass, so might be irrelevant to make these adjustments now. The only ships still m,issing from tiercide are Recons, T3, Black ops and capitals if memory serves me right. what, no shuttle pass? no love, seriously...
Paynus Maiassus Capital Munitions 17	Posted - 2014.06.06 00:16:00 - [701] - Quote I'm not going to read all the input from players on this because I really don't want to get depressed. Highseccers and small and individual corporations will likely use smaller POSes, yes, but these groups will be getting thousands of new moons with Crius. I really think the stated reason of fear of ice devaluation due to smaller POSes is premature. Nullsec POSes are usually large for defensive purposes, and defense will be the primary consideration for POS size. Let things happen, then make adjustments. Also, null sec industry will rely on JFs, and the cost of their use will go up, thereby removing some of the benefit of doing industry in null sec that are supposed to be created by Crius. Also, any changes designed to create ice demand should consider ice supply. I mine ice in high sec. The ice tends to deplete too quickly. I also do some moon mining in low sec. I notice when I am there that all the ice fields are basically empty. Also, I have toons in a CFC null sec alliance, and I notice that the ice fields in our space are almost always empty. I think the bigger factor than smaller POSes will be the effect of an updated Rorqual on low sec and null sec mining. If the Rorqual update allows more mining to happen in low and null, then ice supply will increase. In that case it might warrant creating an increased demand. If the Rorqual update fails to change the low and null mining dynamics, I highly doubt the changes in POS sizes will result in market disturbance. Let the other changes go live and make ice adjustments with Crius 1.5 or something.
Katherine Raven ALTA Industries Intergalactic Conservation Movement 151	Posted - 2014.06.09 17:01:00 - [702] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: I'm not going to read all the input from players on this because I really don't want to get depressed. Highseccers and small and individual corporations will likely use smaller POSes, yes, but these groups will be getting thousands of new moons with Crius. I really think the stated reason of fear of ice devaluation due to smaller POSes is premature. Nullsec POSes are usually large for defensive purposes, and defense will be the primary consideration for POS size. Let things happen, then make adjustments. Also, null sec industry will rely on JFs, and the cost of their use will go up, thereby removing some of the benefit of doing industry in null sec that are supposed to be created by Crius. Also, any changes designed to create ice demand should consider ice supply. I mine ice in high sec. The ice tends to deplete too quickly. I also do some moon mining in low sec. I notice when I am there that all the ice fields are basically empty. Also, I have toons in a CFC null sec alliance, and I notice that the ice fields in our space are almost always empty. I think the bigger factor than smaller POSes will be the effect of an updated Rorqual on low sec and null sec mining. If the Rorqual update allows more mining to happen in low and null, then ice supply will increase. In that case it might warrant creating an increased demand. If the Rorqual update fails to change the low and null mining dynamics, I highly doubt the changes in POS sizes will result in market disturbance. Let the other changes go live and make ice adjustments with Crius 1.5 or something. I know I don't plan on changing my tower size. Though I will be going down to one tower instead of two, so I'll be burning less fuel myself. While many people will be switching to small towers, there's also the possibility of way more people having a tower of any kind now that standings don't matter. Those two things will possibly even out. PI products (specifically the fuel related ones) will possibly drop in value as demand changes. But I'm in agreement with you, I'm not certain the change demand warrants changes such as this, and I don't even operate jump drive ships anymore.
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 748	Posted - 2014.06.09 18:32:00 - [703] - Quote Any plans on adding implants to reduce fuel usage?
BoBoZoBo Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team 426	Posted - 2014.06.10 14:06:00 - [704] - Quote There has been a horrible derailment of the logic train here CCP. Where is the data to support this expected isotope problem? What is the point of pumping up the null economy while you castrate it's logistical ability? New dev cycle... please use it to react quickly to real and proven changes - NOT to pre-empt the player base you continually underestimate. Love, BoBo Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite
McBorsk Multispace Technologies Inc Yulai Federation 33	Posted - 2014.06.10 14:26:00 - [705] - Quote Boooooo!
Araneatrox Sanctuary of Shadows 33	Posted - 2014.06.10 16:19:00 - [706] - Quote 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.
Fleet Me Flying Space Monkeys PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS 13	Posted - 2014.06.10 17:16:00 - [707] - Quote No Just No Why make stuff that is already expencive more expencive! I say no!
Re'doubt Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 28	Posted - 2014.06.10 18:55:00 - [708] - Quote This change hurts the little guys and smaller entrepreneurs more then the nullsec alliances and power blocks. As one of those dudes who does their own thing more often then naught I urge you to reconsider this change. Let the industry changes hit then adjust isotope consumption.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 10420	Posted - 2014.06.10 21:45:00 - [709] - Quote Paynus Maiassus wrote: Let things happen, then make adjustments. Fozzie, take note. This is the responsible way of doing things. You cannot definitively say where the isotope market is going to be after the patch, so trying to make compensatory changes is foolish. Make the other industry changes, and if isotope costs drop too much THEN increase jump drive consumption. Not before. No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh.
WoAz Dark Mason Society Collateral Damage. 5	Posted - 2014.06.11 09:12:00 - [710] - Quote Fixing a problem that may not even exist is a terrible metric for game rebalance. You guys should adapt a wait and see approach.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 77	Posted - 2014.06.11 16:32:00 - [711] - Quote I remember unsubbing just when the drone region nerf hit. I subbed nearly a year later, and the change in market was huge. Sure, maybe some people liked what happened in Eve over the course of the year, but I'm convinced that nerfs impact on the mineral market is very likely why I came back to find most ships were now twice the price they were when I left. So now with fuel prices increasing, doubled with the fact that jf cargoholds decreased...well, ships are about to get a whole lot more expensive. Which means people are less willing to use and risk them in combat. Which mean less explosions. Not good.
Wolf Kraft Underground Smellroad 4	Posted - 2014.06.11 17:35:00 - [712] - Quote I haven't had an opportunity to read through the entire thread, so I apologize if the following has already been brought up. CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. Has there been any consideration that more POS's (of all sizes) are likely to be put up in High-Sec as a result of the standing restrictions being removed? To an extent, POS's represent a more concrete goal for high-sec corps in a 'Look at what we have setup and are able to maintain' kind of way. Of course, they may not all be used strictly for industrial purposes either. Some high-sec corps may just simply setup deathstars to use as a safe haven/home field advantage during wardecs (i.e. 'station guns won't shoot my war targets, but my pos will'). I wouldn't be surprised to see a number of POS's go up in the systems surrounding market hubs as well. CCP Fozzie wrote: Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec. The problem I see with this is that ice is a regional local resource. Individuals/corps/alliances/coalitions maintaining POS's or capitals are not necessarily using just the regional fuel source for either of those things and so they will still need to import these things, now at a much greater cost than before. Is the idea that entities will need/want to switch capitals/towers to what is locally available? Or is the expectation that there will suddenly be new ice mining fleets picking up the slack for (the increased) demand? CCP Fozzie wrote: 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. The slumlord empires of new eden will be able to just simply increase the price of system rentals to compensate. Whereas a smaller entity will be forced to make sacrifices in order to continue operating. Though I'm sure that this point has already been beaten to death several times over by this point.
Anjali Charma Homeless but nevertheless Sexy 0	Posted - 2014.06.12 06:30:00 - [713] - Quote no idea how this will effect the so called "power Projection" but i kinda like the idea as it will drive up the inflation which means more profit :) i dont bother if caps need 50% more fuel its just another bn every month and i doubt noone of the older players really care nor does big alliances as they are loaded with cash (feel free to flame on it but we have worked hard enough to have a healthy wallet and yes i did mine myself as a noob like hell to afford the learning skillbooks as there was no plex you could cash in to buy all ya want like you can do nowdays)) change for younger players or those not loaded with cash? - not really any change for them ... they did mine to supply the 0.0 with minerals and topes and now they will continue doing same as they can just compress themself the ore / ice (yes you may flame on that one too, but every game consists of a grind at the beginning even the game called reallife you cant just get born and buy 50 appartment blocks without grinding for your first one) changes for those living at the arse of nowhere? - no idea really but whoever lives out there is not really depending on imports from empire its just cheaper and easier, i have lived at the arse of nowhere and there were enough indy guys producing the stuff needed. importing stuff was cheaper then buying local products because those manufacturing sold stuff at a 50% or 100% markup or more. even if alliances gave strict 25% max markup, most didnt keep within that range because greed is a beautiful thing. if the local production gets sorted and yes also tech II is possible, then theres no need to import all n everything from empire. maybe this is a chance to start building up a working infrastructure to supply itself. sure topes have to be imported but with the topes being only 0.1 m3 the increase in cost of transport is zer0. all in all i dont see a damn thing that will change ... indy boost + the exhumer boost just happend and the refining changes / jumpdrive changes will equal out each other ... and those with caps including the big coalitions will still enjoy jumping around nopt bothering with the extra few bn's it costs to move the shiny :) plenty changes in the game that doesnt change a damn thing but creating a "little" inflation which is good to make more profit like iRL and more lads buying plex for $_$ because they havnt a clue how to make money. well done at least someone proved he did something for the money he gets paid and may keep his job the player base doesnt get pissed off because nothin is changing but a big love for 0.0 industrials as a bonus ccp is happy because they have had a "new" expansion and more $_$ being generated by selling PLEX. feel free to flame ... just my 50 cent on this.
Carniflex StarHunt Mordus Angels 228	Posted - 2014.06.12 12:23:00 - [714] - Quote Wolf Kraft wrote: Has there been any consideration that more POS's (of all sizes) are likely to be put up in High-Sec as a result of the standing restrictions being removed? To an extent, POS's represent a more concrete goal for high-sec corps in a 'Look at what we have setup and are able to maintain' kind of way. Of course, they may not all be used strictly for industrial purposes either. Some high-sec corps may just simply setup deathstars to use as a safe haven/home field advantage during wardecs (i.e. 'station guns won't shoot my war targets, but my pos will'). I wouldn't be surprised to see a number of POS's go up in the systems surrounding market hubs as well. I have to point out that "standings restrictions" were not really working in preventing people putting up a tower in empire. Everyone and their dogs could get one up if they just desired before standings restrictions removal as well. All it took was a altcorp for putting that tower down. Getting standings for that altcorp was really trivial. That is one of the main reasons for removal of that restriction as everyone was circumventing it anyway. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Yazzinra Scorpion Ventures Rim Worlds Protectorate 41	Posted - 2014.06.12 16:17:00 - [715] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Paynus Maiassus wrote: Let things happen, then make adjustments. Fozzie, take note. This is the responsible way of doing things. You cannot definitively say where the isotope market is going to be after the patch, so trying to make compensatory changes is foolish. Make the other industry changes, and if isotope costs drop too much THEN increase jump drive consumption. Not before. This.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 79	Posted - 2014.06.13 14:01:00 - [716] - Quote People have been calling for a nerf to power projection for some time, but most don't realize that while it would appear CCP is doing nothing, Power Projection is actually going to have a death of a thousand knives. Alliance Logistics is the first victim of these changes. But those increased costs are pushed down to the average alliance member. Your ship prices are going up. Your fuel prices are going up. The cost of 'content' is going up. I cringe whenever I have to fuel up my dread now (and I am by no means poor). Can't wait to see how much more that will cost with Crius.
M1k3y Koontz Thorn Project Surely You're Joking 583	Posted - 2014.06.14 01:13:00 - [717] - 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. Then fleets would simply bring a jump freighter full of Helitopes to fuel their Archon blob. Limiting fuel isn't going to change the way power is projected in EVE. At least not with normal capitals (it might affect Titan bridging, but that would have an adverse effect on small alliances compared to larger alliances) The preemptive fuel change is illogical given the new design plan of a patch every 6 weeks, if fuel prices fall off the map or skyrocket, the changes can be made either in the 1.1 patch, or the next planned cycle. How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Maraner The Executioners Capital Punishment. 292	Posted - 2014.06.15 23:04:00 - [718] - Quote What a dredful idea (pun intended). You know there comes a point when some of these changes just end up making people feel miserable. This is the sort of change / nerf / cost multiplier that actually makes people that have invested in caps just plain pissed off. It wont effect the big null empires, they don't tend to individually pay for their fuel, this will be a painful hit for the small alliances and individuals. Just no. Don't do it. **** someone else instead please. Plus your rationale for doing this is grossly short on facts, can we see a real why that we need to do this please?
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 10470	Posted - 2014.06.17 07:49:00 - [719] - Quote Any word on this? You still planning on going through with this awful idea? No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh.
sabastyian Absolute Massive Destruction Circle-Of-Two 22	Posted - 2014.06.17 08:06:00 - [720] - Quote 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.
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 (sht 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.
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp The Bastion 316	Posted - 2014.07.16 13:56:00 - [751] - Quote Am i getting this right? Fuel consumption goes up by 50%. Fuel Volume goes down by 66%. So when i was using 10k m-¦ of Fuel for traveling, i would now use 15k m-¦ of fuel, but with the reduction in volume, it would only be 5k m-¦? So all in all, more Fuel for travel, while jumping costs 50% more ISK? If so, why is this hurting smaller entities to a bigger degree than big entities? Edit: Aaaah, found it. Get's reduced by 1/3, rather than to 1/3. So volume of fuel consumed stays the same, and price goes up. Stillm why do small entities have more trouble with the ISK? Moving a few Carriers around would cost 50% more ISK, but 50% of 'a bit' is 'half a bit', and 50% of 'a fortune' is 'half a fortune'.
Anthar Thebess 592	Posted - 2014.07.16 13:58:00 - [752] - Quote Renters ; moon go. Smaller groups don't have this. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption
Syrias Bizniz Zebra Corp The Bastion 316	Posted - 2014.07.16 14:02:00 - [753] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Renters ; moon go. Smaller groups don't have this. Well, using a capital army to defend smaller Moon-Goo towers will now quickly explode the costs of defending it, to a point where it might be unprofitable for large entities to blap and maintain the smaller towers.
Khiluale Zotakibe Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.07.16 15:00:00 - [754] - Quote @ CCP Fozzie I'm sorry if someone mentioned this before but wouldn't it make more sense to just increase the fuel bay sizes by 50% instead? With the reduction of the fuel volume there's no change to power projection besides the cost (considering that prices of fuel remain unchanged), while with the fuel bay size increase there would actually be a reduction of how far a ship can go without resupplying. As an example (using representative units to make it simpler to understand): Consider the following route from A to D: A ------ B ------ C ------ D Now: Fuel bay capacity: 10 units Fleet Hangar Capacity: 20 units Going from A to B takes 10 units Going from B to C takes 10 units Going from C to D takes 10 units Which means that a carrier is capable of going from A to D without having to pick extra fuel on the way. Crius (with fuel size reduction): Fuel bay capacity: 15 units Fleet Hangar Capacity: 30 units Going from A to B takes 15 units Going from B to C takes 15 units Going from C to D takes 15 units Which means that a carrier is still capable of going from A to D without having to pick extra fuel on the way. Crius (with fuel bay size increase): Fuel bay capacity: 15 units Fleet Hangar Capacity: 20 units Going from A to B takes 15 units Going from B to C takes 15 units Going from C to D takes 15 units Which means that a carrier is still capable of going from A to C without having to pick extra fuel on the way but will need to resupply to get to D. This would make it harder to quickly deploy a cap fleet across the universe, not impossible, just harder as it would require a bigger logistics effort to maintain fuel at the resupply points, thus nerfing to some degree the power projection. But this is just my view on the subject.
Carniflex StarHunt Mordus Angels 257	Posted - 2014.07.18 05:49:00 - [755] - Quote Khiluale Zotakibe wrote: @ CCP Fozzie I'm sorry if someone mentioned this before but wouldn't it make more sense to just increase the fuel bay sizes by 50% instead? No because some poor bastard has to haul all that fuel to the places where its needed. It's not like the capital pilots in power-blocks haul their own fuel for strategic ops. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Draconus Lofwyr UK Corp RAZOR Alliance 103	Posted - 2014.07.19 03:20:00 - [756] - Quote Draconus Lofwyr wrote: is there any update or input on the jump fuel reduction modules promised with the jump freighter nerf? Now that the Patch notes have been released we see that CCP has chosen to break their promise and further nerf jump freighters. No indication of any promised jump fuel reduction modules that they said would come out with the fuel changes.
Bob Newton Digital Origami Evictus. 0	Posted - 2014.07.21 05:47:00 - [757] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. As mentioned in this dev blog, we are shifting the release of the industry changes back to the Crius release on July 22nd in order to ensure that we have time to incorporate all of your feedback and have extended testing on SISI. Since this change is so closely tied with the industry updates, we are also going to hold off on it for the time being. We will not change the isotope consumption in Kronos, and we will continue to discuss and evaluate our plan with the next potential release window being Crius on July 22nd. Dear CCP Fozzie, Ever since this was first posted on 2014.04.29 13:27 by you, I have been quietly watching this thread on different people's reactions, proposed changes and such, since it concerns me too. The general feeling I get is that most people disapprove of it and so do I. While I agree that with POS/Industry changes, it will affect the ice market. But frankly I do not believe this is the right way to go about it, for starters, I thought EVE's market is driven by players, also when did CCP actively think of market repercussions every time they change something? When there is a change, it will inevitably affect prices of certain items, are CCP going to do something about those too? If this is your ultimate solution to power projection, well, I am sorry, but I and many many others fail to see how this is going to affect anyone but the small guy. Would you care to explain your reasoning and decision making process for such a change? Which leads me to the next point... There have been many ideas and discussions by others that are absolutely great, while some not so great, but the thing that infuriates me the most is not so much in the change itself and the problems it does not solve and creates more because of the previous problems and mistakes you've created and then you aim to solve them by introducing more problems. So what few birds did you hit with one stone? I think many people just wants to hit you with one stone. You see? When you come to mind all I can think of is problems... and I really would like to wish all sorts of nasty for your demise beyond the normal human imagination which I must refrain from saying. So back on topic, your last reply was 2014.05.12 18:40, a whole 2 months ago and a bit more, what attempts have you made to communicate with the players concerned regarding their ideas and feedback? Care to further explain into your reasoning and thought process that makes this change at all reasonable sounding? With regards to local resource gathering, are you adding different racial ice to all regions? are you suggesting that different regions should standardise on their capital and POS tower use based on their local ice instead? how about certain towers are unable to even fit complex reactions? CCP Fozzie, I am sure you are probably a great guy in person and perhaps skilled at doing what your job requires, but from my point of view, a player's point of view, you are horrible and I really dont see what you are skilled at apart from infuriating the players who frankly are also customers. So perhaps you may want to start by addressing some of the questions us players have not necessarily mine. Kind Regards, Bob Newton PS: I hope my reply is within allowable specification, as I believe it is on topic and expresses my feeling towards the change and of the developer involved with as little off topic as possible. However should it not be, I will repost it on a forum where it allows for discussion, because frankly, I dont see discussion, just announcement of poorly thought out changes forced upon players.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1142	Posted - 2014.07.21 16:38:00 - [758] - Quote Carniflex wrote: Khiluale Zotakibe wrote: @ CCP Fozzie I'm sorry if someone mentioned this before but wouldn't it make more sense to just increase the fuel bay sizes by 50% instead? No because some poor bastard has to haul all that fuel to the places where its needed. It's not like the capital pilots in power-blocks haul their own fuel for strategic ops. Account bound topes!!!! No more hauling of topes for someone else!!! The logistic nightmare now is TOTALLY on the cap user's shoulder!!!! This will TOTALLY solve the problem of people being able to jump across the universe nearly at will because noone will ever want to deal with havng a cap AND the fuel logistics of such trip!!!!
Alyssa Haginen State War Academy Caldari State 35	Posted - 2014.07.21 19:34:00 - [759] - Quote Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? Some people seem to think your fuel capacity will increase after this update which is not true. 50% increase in fuel use minus a 33% decrease in fuel volume equals a 17% loss to your fuel capacity. Again 50 - 33 = 17% loss overall range/storage.
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 1022	Posted - 2014.07.21 20:12:00 - [760] - Quote Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? Some people seem to think your fuel capacity will increase after this update which is not true. 50% increase in fuel use minus a 33% decrease in fuel volume equals a 17% loss to your fuel capacity. Again 50 - 33 = 17% loss overall range/storage. One more thing it does is ruins the covert jump portal because it will take 3/4 tank of fuel to jump one plate fit recon. Omg dat math doe Seriously go back to your high school records and double check the name on your diploma. E: in the spirit of not being TOO much of an a**hole here's the correct formula For ease of use we'll pretend 100 isotopes takes up 100m3 and also assume that is a full cargo. 100x1.5 (fuel coat increase) = 150 150x.66 (size reduction) = 99 (if you use .66 continuous then it rounds up to 100 properly)
Khiluale Zotakibe Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 3	Posted - 2014.07.22 10:27:00 - [761] - Quote Carniflex wrote: Khiluale Zotakibe wrote: @ CCP Fozzie I'm sorry if someone mentioned this before but wouldn't it make more sense to just increase the fuel bay sizes by 50% instead? No because some poor bastard has to haul all that fuel to the places where its needed. It's not like the capital pilots in power-blocks haul their own fuel for strategic ops. I know, the desired effect would be to make if harder to fuel logistics for quick moves across the map. More resupply points = slower move More resupply points = Higher logistics effort All of this because crossing the universe shouldn't be easy nor quick.
Alyssa Haginen State War Academy Caldari State 35	Posted - 2014.07.22 16:57:00 - [762] - Quote Rowells wrote: Omg dat math doe Seriously go back to your high school records and double check the name on your diploma. E: in the spirit of not being TOO much of an a**hole here's the correct formula For ease of use we'll pretend 100 isotopes takes up 100m3 and also assume that is a full cargo. 100x1.5 (fuel coat increase) = 150 150x.66 (size reduction) = 99 (if you use .66 continuous then it rounds up to 100 properly) Shut up thats called political math. ;p
Joraa Starkmanir Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 21	Posted - 2014.07.22 23:03:00 - [763] - Quote Alyssa Haginen wrote: Shut up thats called political math. ;p Nothing political ever give a real answer, so that cant be political math... If his math was 2 pages long, talking about everything remotly related (or not) then ending up with an unsertan answer it would be political math
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 93	Posted - 2014.07.23 13:45:00 - [764] - Quote I'm convinced CCP took the wrong approach to this altogether. When they went and made jumping more expensive, what they should have done was make it take more time. Yes, now power projection costs more, but the big blocs don't really care and it won't make any real difference for them. It will certainly help to crush the little guys out there tho. This is one thing I hope they roll back. I'm sure somewhere in their six-week development cycle they could make jumping require a spoolup time.
Suzuka A1 Multiplex Gaming The Bastion 23	Posted - 2014.07.23 13:48:00 - [765] - Quote Rowells wrote: Seriously go back to your high school records and double check the name on your diploma. There is no need to get personal. This needs to be a constructive conversation. 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
Suzuka A1 Multiplex Gaming The Bastion 23	Posted - 2014.07.23 13:51:00 - [766] - Quote Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? I'm looking at the market and cannot find them. I don't remember seeing anything about them being delayed. 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
Mantis Baghdad Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2014.07.23 14:04:00 - [767] - Quote Suzuka A1 wrote: Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? I'm looking at the market and cannot find them. I don't remember seeing anything about them being delayed. Neither can I. I'm not sure why we haven't heard any of the relevant CCP developers comment in this thread for as long as it has been. Obviously the +50% isotope consumption changed (without actually fundamentally addressing the power projection issues), now I'm curious to know if the jump fuel conservation modules for jump freighters still plan on being introduced let alone even discussed.
Takeshi Kazuki Push Industries Push Interstellar Network 0	Posted - 2014.07.23 18:39:00 - [768] - Quote Suzuka A1 wrote: Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? I'm looking at the market and cannot find them. I don't remember seeing anything about them being delayed. It never said it would be released in Crius. In fact when I pulled up the freighter thread it said it would be implemented after Crius.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 10756	Posted - 2014.07.24 00:48:00 - [769] - Quote Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 1054	Posted - 2014.07.24 02:11:00 - [770] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Sweet
TheButcherPete Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension 448	Posted - 2014.07.24 05:59:00 - [771] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Fozzie, I like you man, but this 6 week thing is already off to a bad start. What were Crius' original features that were pushed back to Hyperion, starting a really crappy pattern? THE KING OF EVE RADIO If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?
Jarnis McPieksu Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 513	Posted - 2014.07.24 06:41:00 - [772] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Make them cheap to build so it doesn't cost me arm & leg to buy 6 for each carrier to be fitted before each jump.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.24 07:02:00 - [773] - Quote TheButcherPete wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Fozzie, I like you man, but this 6 week thing is already off to a bad start. What were Crius' original features that were pushed back to Hyperion, starting a really crappy pattern? I take it you have not watched the respective Fanfest presentation where CCP talked about specifically this "issue", have you? Jarnis McPieksu wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Make them cheap to build so it doesn't cost me arm & leg to buy 6 for each carrier to be fitted before each jump. Like the Hyperspatial Velocitiy Amplifiers?
Anthar Thebess 607	Posted - 2014.07.24 09:21:00 - [774] - Quote Jarnis McPieksu wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Make them cheap to build so it doesn't cost me arm & leg to buy 6 for each carrier to be fitted before each jump. I really hope that this will be only JF modules. If you are planing to add them to other capitals make them refitatble ONLY on stations. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption
AtomicGrog Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance 2	Posted - 2014.07.25 02:03:00 - [775] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Jarnis McPieksu wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey guys. I'm doing some design work on the fuel conservation modules this week and we expect they should be ready for the Hyperion release (coming up next). I'll be posting a new feedback thread for them as soon as we're a little further. Make them cheap to build so it doesn't cost me arm & leg to buy 6 for each carrier to be fitted before each jump. I really hope that this will be only JF modules. If you are planing to add them to other capitals make them refitable ONLY on stations. Obviously excepting the caps that cant dock...
Gaijin Lanis Surely You're Joking 122	Posted - 2014.07.25 02:16:00 - [776] - Quote AtomicGrog wrote: Obviously excepting the caps that cant dock... Whats wrong with keeping conservation modules off super-capitals and titans completely? As has been mentioned over and over (and over) in this thread, the cost to jump is completely out of line with the mass/volume of a ship. The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 247	Posted - 2014.07.25 03:16:00 - [777] - Quote Gaijin Lanis wrote: AtomicGrog wrote: Obviously excepting the caps that cant dock... Whats wrong with keeping conservation modules off super-capitals and titans completely? As has been mentioned over and over (and over) in this thread, the cost to jump is completely out of line with the mass/volume of a ship. Compared to what? Carrier 1,500 isotopes per 6.5 LY Titan 1,500 isotopes per 3.5 LY Moving a Titan the same distance as a carrier, will cost you nearly 50% more isotopes. A titan is twice the mass/volume of a carrier. Seems balanced to me. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care..
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 1062	Posted - 2014.07.25 05:00:00 - [778] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: AtomicGrog wrote: Obviously excepting the caps that cant dock... Whats wrong with keeping conservation modules off super-capitals and titans completely? As has been mentioned over and over (and over) in this thread, the cost to jump is completely out of line with the mass/volume of a ship. Compared to what? Carrier 1,500 isotopes per 6.5 LY Titan 1,500 isotopes per 3.5 LY Moving a Titan the same distance as a carrier, will cost you nearly 50% more isotopes. A titan is twice the mass/volume of a carrier. Seems balanced to me. Nope. Those numbers are per lightyear. Little tooltip even says so. The only ships with more than 1500/LY are jump freighter coming in at 4100-4400/LY. The lightest titan (Ragnarok) is 2.16 times bigger in mass than the heaviest JF (Rhea), but uses 66% less fuel at base numbers.
Sgt Ocker Last Bastion of Freedom 247	Posted - 2014.07.25 06:02:00 - [779] - Quote Rowells wrote: Sgt Ocker wrote: Gaijin Lanis wrote: AtomicGrog wrote: Obviously excepting the caps that cant dock... Whats wrong with keeping conservation modules off super-capitals and titans completely? As has been mentioned over and over (and over) in this thread, the cost to jump is completely out of line with the mass/volume of a ship. Compared to what? Carrier 1,500 isotopes per 6.5 LY Titan 1,500 isotopes per 3.5 LY Moving a Titan the same distance as a carrier, will cost you nearly 50% more isotopes. A titan is twice the mass/volume of a carrier. Seems balanced to me. Nope. Those numbers are per lightyear. Little tooltip even says so. The only ships with more than 1500/LY are jump freighter coming in at 4100-4400/LY. The lightest titan (Ragnarok) is 2.16 times bigger in mass than the heaviest JF (Rhea), but uses 66% less fuel at base numbers. Yes, when I re-read it just now I realized my error. Doubling the cost to move supers is not unreasonable (although it would be a very controversial change) On the other hand, JF fuel costs are disproportionate. To balance JF costs it could to be based on empty or loaded. If your JF has an empty cargo hold it costs, say, 1.500 per LY to move, if it is loaded with goodies, the cost is increased. A bit like a truck on a highway, empty it can get 8 mpg, once loaded it gets 5 mpg. The problem would be with coding such a change. TQ would need to recognize the difference between a JF with an empty cargo hold and a full one. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care..
Max Goldwing Homeworld Republic The Explicit Alliance 11	Posted - 2014.07.25 07:24:00 - [780] - Quote Takeshi Kazuki wrote: Suzuka A1 wrote: Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? I'm looking at the market and cannot find them. I don't remember seeing anything about them being delayed. It never said it would be released in Crius. In fact when I pulled up the freighter thread it said it would be implemented after Crius. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345280 Quote: To help address the lack of interesting options for Jump Freighters, we are planning to introduce a set of jump fuel conservation modules in the Crius release in July. These modules will not be available in Kronos. Obviously planning didnt work, so now they are planning for next cycle, with no numbers released since that initial post, well see if they need more planning
Gaijin Lanis Surely You're Joking 122	Posted - 2014.07.25 07:32:00 - [781] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Yes, when I re-read it just now I realized my error. Doubling the cost to move supers is not unreasonable (although it would be a very controversial change) On the other hand, JF fuel costs are disproportionate. To balance JF costs it could to be based on empty or loaded. If your JF has an empty cargo hold it costs, say, 1.500 per LY to move, if it is loaded with goodies, the cost is increased. A bit like a truck on a highway, empty it can get 8 mpg, once loaded it gets 5 mpg. The problem would be with coding such a change. TQ would need to recognize the difference between a JF with an empty cargo hold and a full one. I'm not saying to straight double super/titan jump costs. I'm saying to give the smaller capitals a means by which to reduce their jump costs. As far as mass affecting jump fuel usage, whats really fun is when you realize every single item in the game has a "mass" attribute that has never done anything. The above was written and posted with nothing but love in my heart for all.
Takeshi Kazuki Push Industries Push Interstellar Network 0	Posted - 2014.07.25 19:52:00 - [782] - Quote Max Goldwing wrote: Takeshi Kazuki wrote: Suzuka A1 wrote: Alyssa Haginen wrote: Where are the low slot fuel conservation modules that were coming with this change? I'm looking at the market and cannot find them. I don't remember seeing anything about them being delayed. It never said it would be released in Crius. In fact when I pulled up the freighter thread it said it would be implemented after Crius. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345280 Quote: To help address the lack of interesting options for Jump Freighters, we are planning to introduce a set of jump fuel conservation modules in the Crius release in July. These modules will not be available in Kronos. Obviously planning didnt work, so now they are planning for next cycle, with no numbers released since that initial post, well see if they need more planning That post inherently contradicts itself saying it would both be in crius and after crius. I would assume that indicates it being in a 1.x release.
Vaju Enki Secular Wisdom 1379	Posted - 2014.07.26 09:15:00 - [783] - Quote The price should be much higher. Teleporting around in EvE should be very expensive. The Tears Must Flow
Carniflex StarHunt Mordus Angels 261	Posted - 2014.07.28 14:19:00 - [784] - Quote Vaju Enki wrote: The price should be much higher. Teleporting around in EvE should be very expensive. You can already teleport around EVE on 2 minute timer with the price depending on how much SP you have. In some locations you can get up to 50% discount even for that teleporting fee (FW stations in upgraded system). So grabbing your pitchfork and going after jump drives is just attacking the tip of the iceberg. You can remove jump drives alltogehter and you will still have people teleporting around. Jumps clones, death clones, alts to name the most obvious and reliable avenues for that. Less reliable way of teleporting without jump drives or bridges is, for example, using wormholes. Takes just some patience to get where you need. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 10835	Posted - 2014.07.29 21:24:00 - [785] - Quote Rowells wrote: Nope. Those numbers are per lightyear. Little tooltip even says so. Where is this tooltip you're talking about? No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh.
Ray Kyonhe Ray's Relentless Research 111	Posted - 2014.07.29 22:49:00 - [786] - Quote Carniflex wrote: You can already teleport around EVE on 2 minute timer with the price depending on how much SP you have. In some locations you can get up to 50% discount even for that teleporting fee (FW stations in upgraded system). Teleporting is not an issue by itself, power projection is. Don't hide behind words. Teleporting eggs can't threaten anyone. Teleporting capitals and blops can. Teleporting jumpfreighters can too, as they provide logistics for capitals and supercapitals, and their subcap escort. Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link
Rowells Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans 1093	Posted - 2014.07.29 23:53:00 - [787] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Rowells wrote: Nope. Those numbers are per lightyear. Little tooltip even says so. Where is this tooltip you're talking about? Hover the cursor over the jump fuel requirement in the info tab.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 10837	Posted - 2014.07.30 07:52:00 - [788] - Quote Oh nevermind I see what you're saying. No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh.
Carniflex StarHunt Mordus Angels 266	Posted - 2014.07.30 08:04:00 - [789] - Quote Ray Kyonhe wrote: Carniflex wrote: You can already teleport around EVE on 2 minute timer with the price depending on how much SP you have. In some locations you can get up to 50% discount even for that teleporting fee (FW stations in upgraded system). Teleporting is not an issue by itself, power projection is. Don't hide behind words. Teleporting eggs can't threaten anyone. Teleporting capitals and blops can. Teleporting jumpfreighters can too, as they provide logistics for capitals and supercapitals, and their subcap escort. What I was meaning was that even outright removing jump drives completely will not remove or even significantly hurt power projection. All it would change would how it happens. Ans ofc the Malcanis law applies still. Anything you do that squeezes established power blocks in a way they notice logistics wise will outright neuter the smaller not so established groups. To be more precise and explain in more detail why teleporting egg's is still a viable form of power projection. The only difference between hopping a carrier blob around is that you need a bit more preparation as you need to have sufficient hardware present where you are going while with a carrier you are just dragging your pile of crap with you. Even outright removal of jump drives does not prevent an established powerblock having a suitable number of doctrine ships prepared in predetermined locations. Even without jump freighters there are ways of moving large amount of "stuff" around. For example, I have built an outpost 45 ly deep in null without needing to use jump drives for moving the egg and the upgrades through gates or by titan/jump bridges. All it took was a little patience and I was able to find suitable wormholes to move about 6 T1 freighters out there without losing a single one. Just for extra safety you can escort one with dozen falcons and few webbers if you feel like it as it makes it significantly less likely that you lose one by random unluck. The smaller entities might not have the resources and logistical capability to maintain number of fleet doctrines in convenient spots all over EVE. By the same logic - if you increase the fuel costs to the level where it prevents a large power-block teleporting their carrier blob 60 light years to the left all that happens is that they will have a pile of these carriers stockpiled in a small number of prepared locations, they will jump clone / death clone there and will be on grid even faster (and with lower probability of being delayed by a suicide bubbler in some midpoint by few minutes) while any smaller or not so established entity will be crippled by increased costs to the point where all they can field is interceptor swarm unless it's happening within 1 jump of their staging area. It would also nuke any viability of actually living in deeper regions as it is still not possible to be fully self sufficient in null sec because of how the resources have been distributed in EVE. Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Anthar Thebess 621	Posted - 2014.07.30 08:29:00 - [790] - Quote https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=356024 In this topic you will find proposed solutions to most issues you state. Sov based on activity - your alliance have to live in space , or it will degrade to the point that few people can grind it down within hours. Sov ownership shifting to most active corporation in this system. If you rent some remote system, renters will quite fast get ownership of the system sov infrastructure , and when they leave - systems go with them. Extra gate connections to nearest NPC space from each region. Smuggler gates capable of moving non capital ships. Capitals incapable of doing regional jumps, but forced to use XL Regional gate to pas between each region they cross. Those gates only exist in direction to the nearest NPC space. So in order to get from Cache to Period Basis you have to move your capitals : http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map Cache->Grate Wildlands ->Curse ->Catch->Stain->Period Basis. And those are just extra choke points , as in each region you will probably need 1 or 2 midpoints. No more safe jumps from station to station. You have to pass the gates! Clone station changes only to the one you are currently present in Null space and low sec. Just to limit death cloning. And many many more. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption
Ray Kyonhe Ray's Relentless Research 111	Posted - 2014.07.30 08:33:00 - [791] - Quote Carniflex wrote: The only difference between hopping a carrier blob around is that you need a bit more preparation as you need to have sufficient hardware present where you are going while with a carrier you are just dragging your pile of crap with you. Even outright removal of jump drives does not prevent an established powerblock having a suitable number of doctrine ships prepared in predetermined locations. Even without jump freighters there are ways of moving large amount of "stuff" around. For example, I have built an outpost 45 ly deep in null without needing to use jump drives for moving the egg and the upgrades through gates or by titan/jump bridges. All it took was a little patience and I was able to find suitable wormholes to move about 6 T1 freighters out there without losing a single one. This is it. You are missing the vital point. There isn't such thing as total security, but security issues should be attended and it's leve should be kept high enough anyway. The goal is not remove power projection but make projecting power very daunting and time consuming task. What you described is perfectly acceptable - this will enshure that no one will go to such extent without absolute, crucial need. So no more capital fleet drops out of boredom. From the other angle, if you just to moved all your main forces well beyond your jump drive coverage with some other slower and less convinient, and more risky methods of travel, you can't move them back easly, which opens wide avenues for counterstrike and treacherous backstabs to you own home systems. This won't allow to just controle all space around with your core, trusted blob. You either sit at home and don't project your power, or you are rely totally on diplomatics relations with those allies settled adjacent to your own home - as they should be responsible to protect your home while you are went out to war. And thats adds to the uncertainty too, as now this allies don't fear so much you too, as you can't project power so well. So if you mistaken their intentions and move your forces out to some distant region and it will need like a weak to relocate them back - they can strike your back, and do this instantly as your home region is in their jump drive coverage. So dimplomatic and trust issues becomes even more of a problem, and will deliver powerfull shakes to any empire from time to time - which is exaclty what we need. So, this simple fix will serve two goals at once: 1) Make power projection more tedious and risky and time consuming task 2) Lower stability and shorten lifespan of huge alliances, especially if they try to project their power well beyond (now shrinked) jump drive. coverage, Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 27 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.