|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
92
   |
Posted - 2017.03.07 09:13:15 -
[1] - Quote
If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why!
From the Economic Report
The massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2017.03.08 11:14:02 -
[2] - Quote
Axhind wrote:Marcus Tedric wrote:If it hasn't been obvious before - this is why! From the Economic ReportThe massive increase is almost entirely due to Carrier/Super-ratting. Problem is that this is the first time ratting is actually engaging game play. You have to pay attention and you can't multibox it which puts on a nice limit for scaling. First time ever that PvE is somewhat engaging and now it is being removed.
On your first two-and-a-half points I can only agree.
But it's not being removed - it's being made more difficult - which should have the intended effect.
Yes, I will also be one of those affected, but I understand why it's being done. Hyper-inflation is bad. Printing money is bad - I just wish the BoE and our silly Chancellor(s) would get that too........ 
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
92
|
Posted - 2017.03.11 19:25:39 -
[3] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:ApolloF117 HUN wrote:so why does a fighter that is 38m long have 100m sig radios while a 280m long destroyer has 60m? In game and lore terms signature radius is a measure primarily of how easy something is to lock onto and hit cleanly. Hence why Target Painters increase sig while Command Bursts can decrease it. Neither is changing the physical size of the ship, they're just changing how the ship appears to guns and sensors.
Forget game and lore - the F-22 Raptor has something like the RCS (Radar Cross Section) of a sparrow.
Queue quotes of falling sparrows and think Stealth!
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2017.03.14 22:07:26 -
[4] - Quote
Nisse wrote:...............Hope that all makes sense :).
Perfectly.
The only thing you got wrong was your conclusion.
'1' is the absolutely correct answer - the last Economic Report showed the evidence.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
93
|
Posted - 2017.03.17 12:40:34 -
[5] - Quote
Waited until today....
8 Sanctums/Havens run - no changes to Carrier fit - switched to T1 fighters both to save on losses and have them weaker...
But none lost - and only had to recall a Squadron 3 times in total.
Other than that - it was, specifically carrier ratting that needed the nerf - I can't think of any other change they might have done that could target just that - especially when it targets multi-boxing specifically (for you have to pay more attention).
And CCP have also addressed many issues brought up by sub-cap pilots vs carriers in the same way.
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
100
|
Posted - 2017.03.29 10:01:49 -
[6] - Quote
Affenmesserkampf Achsoo wrote:Try carrier ratting with 3 accounts absolutely stressful to play, no fun at all. and u will lose fighters. Expensive as they are its not a good deal to rat anymore with more than one account.........
Yes - and I am afraid that this ^^ is exactly why the change(s) have happened.
Ratting with 3 x Ishtars mostly afk, or indeed 3 x Carriers before the changes to Fighters, doesn't break the isk faucet from ratting. But being able to run 3 x Carriers/Supers does - and that's why....
Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium
|
|
|
| |
|