|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 40 post(s) |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
658
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 22:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Soldarius wrote:Blue Harrier wrote:Thanks for the earlier reply to my other post.
Now a question; We now have the facility to anchor a POS in high sector space but do I take it we will not be able to harvest moons?
I did try and set up a Moon Harvesting Array but got a long winded message about it had to be in 0.4 or less (I think). The message vanishes far too quickly to read it all and because it has multiple lines itGÇÖs very difficult to read all of it in one go.
The tl;dr: You cannot do moon mining in .4 or higher. That is it. I hope that one day that changes. I've never been a fan of artificial and/or arbitrary limitations. Then again, it would probably completely crash the moongoo market. 0.5 or higher as of Crius. We changed a >= to a > so the code does what the authoring was always assuming it did. I just fixed the display text for the attributes this afternoon to reflect this, but the code should already be in place. This change stands to add 11243 moons to the available mining pool. This is roughly 175 r64s, assuming constant distribution. Is it your intention to decrease the value of moon minerals in this fashion? 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
683
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 17:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Please stop basing your priorities on cute little sayings. I don't think you get euphemisms. 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
683
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 18:00:00 -
[3] - Quote
For those who haven't twigged to it yet -- these changes are being made with the expectation that it will cause a drawdown in starbase usage. This is why they are coupling it with an increase in fuel usage for jumping capitals, using jump bridges, and firing the titan doomsday weapons. 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
684
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 19:51:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kenneth Skybound wrote: This is hand waving at it's very best. You don't cancel an entire section of content because some people cannot fathom things happening on a 1 hour cycle. Would you remove the rest of starbase mechanics affected by this 1 hour cycle until it can be very carefully presented to the layest of men? Or would you leave the content in to be used with a note in a description or two explaining there is such a cycle, while working on a way to make it clearer in a later patch?
You're too focused on the "up to an hour" bit. This is not necessarily the case, and I would go so far as to say that it is probably not the case. I suspect it was more related to the technical problems involved with implementing it compared against the possible benefit. Perhaps they are okay with the commensurate reduction in starbase usage that will result from this change.
Also, I hardly think that "hey, anchoring multiple arrays gives a bonus" counts as "content." It was just a gimme to try and justify the use of larger starbases in the post-crius industry landscape. It sounds like they've changed their priorities a bit. It happens, especially as deadlines loom. It's not a big deal. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
|
|
|