Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |

Gisele Serebriakova
Norman's Meat Market
2
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:39:02 -
[61] - Quote
ermahgerd
ERMAHGERD!
Seems nice. No more auto-money for the lazies with supercaps.
Is there a delay between release of the facilities/BPO's and turning off POS goo mining/reactions to give people time to set up the new facilities? Otherwise t2 prices should blow up for a month or three with near zero production and refinery costs at peak. |

SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
4
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:39:03 -
[62] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Glad to be able to get this ball rolling and start bringing the community into the early process of developing these structures. We're releasing these blogs now so that we can focus Fanfest on listening to you folks. We also look forward to hearing from you all in this thread.
I'm wondering about something, and this is a serious question ...
those "chunks" of rock, will I be able to bump them so they crash into other people, structures and planets?
(Yes, I remember splash damage) |

Raddan Eldre'Thalas
4 Marketeers Rura-Penthe
26
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:41:10 -
[63] - Quote
Quote:However, for this first release we are not currently planning on expanding moon mining to areas of space where it is not available today (highsec and wormholes). Although this gameplay has the potential to be interesting and fun in any area of space we want to be careful not to dilute the regional value of tech two resource collection too much.
Just throw us wormhole dwellers a bone already and give us moon mining! As my friend says Quote:literally no lore reason not to, just nullbears bitching that they want exclusive rights to it
If you so worried about diluting the value of T2 resources then just Quote:...determining how much or little we may need to adjust distribution of moon minerals . |

Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:42:06 -
[64] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:Please for the love of god dont keep the current distribution of moon goo - there are areas of space that are so lacking and the weird distribution of certain elements is daft.
I'd suggest starting from scratch:
Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Not saying massive screw up the ballancing but say if a belt gives you 1,000,000 units of goo once refined you get:
Atmospheric Gases x 200,000 Evaporate Depositsx 200,000 Hydrocarbonsx 200,000 Silicatesx 200,000 Cobaltx 25,000 Scandiumx 25,000 Titaniumx 25,000 Tungstenx 25,000 Cadmiumx 15,000 Vandiumx 15,000 Platinumx 15,000 Chromiumx 15,000 Caesiumx 7,500 Technetiumx 7,500 Hafniumx 7,500 Mercuryx 7,500 Promethiumx 2,500 Dysprosiumx 2,500 Neodymiumx 2,500 Thuliumx 2,500
you can then play with individual moons so a current Dyspro moon could give 25,000 per belt.
its a rough idea I grant you but please dont leave goo like it is now
This is a really good compromise idea |

ArmyOfMe
Hull Breach. Reverberation Project
630
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:43:09 -
[65] - Quote
Bear Templar wrote:ArmyOfMe wrote: ... Also, even tho making this an active thing, it will make life in low sec even harder, as most large alliances in low sec doesnt have industrialists in their ranks. ...
Isn't this a good thing though? I'm not a low-sec industrialist myself but i get a feeling from the forums that low-sec (in general) could do with a boost. I doubt this in any way will work as a low sec boost. Sadly low sec is the most overlooked part of eve and hasnt had anything happen to it since faction warfare was introduced in 2008 (other then the sentry gun changes which I to this day still have no clue why they implemented)
GM Guard > I must ask you not to use the petition option like this again but i personally would finish the chicken sandwich first so it won´t go to waste. The spaghetti will keep and you can use it the next time you get hungry. Best regards.
|

Liira Savlin
Dominion Fleet Group
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:26 -
[66] - Quote
SIEGE RED wrote:Liira Savlin wrote:So here are some thoughts i have from what i've read so far:
Active gameplay is all well and good, but i do think these should be released with drilling platforms. If you assume drilling platforms provide the ability to passively extract resources, you could set the gameplay for these to work in tandem with drilling structures, but they would have less yield than actively mining them. Snuff and a few others here have raised some very important points about how this hurts lowsec groups that rely on passive moon goo income.
Something to consider yes. None of that however offsets required organisational adaptation - things change in EVE, it's the only constant. Liira Savlin wrote:
If you're going to force active gameplay, you're going to HAVE to open up w-space and hisec to moon mining with these structures if you don't want to see the t2 economy to violently crash and burn. I'd bet my left toe that MOST of the people (if not upwards of 90%) rely on moon mining to be passive, and would prefer to keep it that way to suppliment their most decidedly non-pve activities. Many of these people, especially non-fw lowsec groups, would sooner go to null or w-space than be forced to mine or do PVE activities to suppliment their income. The idea of any of them running mining operations in lowsec, let alone the meat grinder of FW space, is one of the grossest misunderstandings of player behavior since Incarna. It will NOT end well for anyone involved.
Why? Things crashing and burning is not only good for gameplay, it's good for underlying economics - and there's never been any situation where such a thing had any tangible impact on player abilities. I remember cap recharger II's at 40m a pop with towers burning. And the show was still on the road. If anything, **** was more alive. If one can say such a strange thing about biological waste. Good counterpoints to my doomsaying, but you can't deny that goo suppy is going to be hit massively. There was a good post about balancing distribution of goo more widely that could be a good compromise to this, since it would also help out smaller groups. Liira Savlin wrote:
If this is going to come to pass as-advertised, then let me make a little suggestion: Add d-scan immunity to the porpoise and the skiff. Giving lowsec and nullsec mining operations some decent counterplay is going to be essential if you're putting the burden of AN ENTIRE SECTION OF THE ECONOMY into active gameplay with a fat load of risk involved, where it was passive before. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of player behavior in regards to how the t2 economy works with moon goo.
Our BPO's welcome that suggestion, but I'd kinda like to see the Noctis pick up a little love here. Small, specialised, room for younger characters, less n+1 counter paths, more room for small scale pew pew, etc. Also, it's not "an entire section of the economy". It's just human behaviour. It can still be passive, just pay/seduce/let/make/force others to do it for you, if needs be. Economics of scale following group behaviour still applies. And specialisation remains king.
|

Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2745
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:36 -
[67] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Maetel Lithium
Shinigami Miners
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:40 -
[68] - Quote
This process of creating a mineable field as detailed in this devblog is down-right exciting. I have always wanted more "active mining" and this actually achieves STRATEGIC game play, while keeping a well accepted tactical game play style. |

Nerriana
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
10
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:44:56 -
[69] - Quote
Emmy Mnemonic wrote:This clearly opens up for completely new gameplay. And EVE just got a tad bit more complex (is that even possible!?)
One thought; Ore-fields will "explode" in vicinity of a Refinery citdadel, so that mining fleets can be "covered" by the Refinery weapons. So they will spawn completely within the weapon envelops of the Refineries? Or will it be possible to sneak in ninja-mining ships in areas of the ore-fields that are NOT covered by the weapons? Would it be possible to place other citadels in such a way that you get dual/multiple coverage of the ore-fields?
An interesting gameplay choice would be that since only a refinery citadel can cover the ore-field, the refinery citadel weaponry would require an active gunner and not do anything on automatic. This would make ninja-mining possible (if there's nobody at the controls or the controller is AFK, the ninja-miners can mine without interference from the citadel) and still allow for active defense of friendly miners. |

Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:47:12 -
[70] - Quote
CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|
|

Drammie Askold
Saints Of Havoc Rate My Ticks
59
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:47:47 -
[71] - Quote
Making moon mining active and a group activity is an excellent idea. I think that CCP has hit the bullseye with these structures. Kudos to team Five O 
What New Eden needed was Wise Immortal Philosopher Kings. What New Eden got was Sociopathic Immortal poo-flinging monkeys . . . vOv
|

Anna Lightyear
Red Storm Rising
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:50:34 -
[72] - Quote
With this move, what's the plan for the Siphons? |

marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. The Bastion
180
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:51:00 -
[73] - Quote
There are so many grey areas and holes in this 'String' of updates it's hard to see were CCP are going with this update.
They talk about co-operation in Corps and Alliances while selectively forgetting that this type of behavior has never been something Eve players have ever engaged in willingly, even when forced to do so by CCP mechanics it has never ended in a progressive increase in this type of activity.
Again we see only a partial set of ideas released, some which have been pointed out in this thread already are areas that will do no good for the participants, small alliances and corporations will not be able to participate in this as they will not have the people available to put in the time required and as such will be shut out. Similar with Alpha's and CCP's, 'So far and no further' policy they to are shut out of this
Overall while I am sure CCP Devs have put a lot of time into this it looks over complicated even from the brief outline placed in the Blog, Hours or even weeks to realize any meaningful output and all indication to date are that some minerals will only be available through this means, again CCP arm twisting to participate which to date has never ended well for the players or the game.
While I agree that PoS structure mechanics badly needed an overhaul, all of this was for nothing after CCP homogenized the Eve universe taking out of the equation some of the largest content generators there have ever been in the game replacing them with bland featureless updates like the latest Sov iteration that have not brought back those heady days when players actually had some reason to fight for resources, every indication is that this new set up will cause some conflict, but not over resources but only the structures installed to gather them and we have already had a taste of that system.
Question I ask is how many of these structures can we as players eat at one time without getting thoroughly sick of the taste while even the one's we have are unfinished works in progress so full of bugs and lacking full utility as they are currently, again CCP Dev's box ticking at it's worst as predicted, nothing is getting finished before a new round of updates comes along driven by some schedule as yet unpublished by CCP.
Years past all the players ever really wanted from the Dev's was to fix the game, repair what was broken and make it work as advertised, instead they got even more 'New' stuff, broken from the outset leaving the players chasing from one update to the next but always feeling let down once again, This proposal looks to be yet another one of those.
Humanity is the thin veneer that remains after you remove the baffled chimp.
|

Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2746
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:15 -
[74] - Quote
Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Here's a relevant quote from Fozzie:
CCP Fozzie [23:52] more people have asked me about siphons in the last hour than have used siphons in the past week :slightly_smiling_face:
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
52
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:32 -
[75] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
NC is taking all of em in our area at least , so prolly not lol |

DarkCookie23
Slays Industrial Core
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:52:56 -
[76] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Do you understand the impact this will have on lowsec?
Most of the larger lowsec alliance rely on passive moon income and have less isk making opportunities on an alliance level than nullsec allainces which was outlined on some reddit posts made during the leaks and an article on crossing zebra,
No one in lowsec is gonna mine so rip lowsec????
as a low sec miner i look forward to these changes and hope my high sec mining brothers will join me in the ninja mining fun of this new system.
know if only there was a move active way of doing PI 
Thank you CCP, I hope to hear more as this develops |

Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 16:58:50 -
[77] - Quote
DarkCookie23 wrote:[
as a low sec miner s
Stop trollin pls |

Hy Wanto Destroyer
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Snuffed Out
53
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:00:16 -
[78] - Quote
Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. |

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:00:45 -
[79] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one?
Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon. |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
4030
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:08:28 -
[80] - Quote
Once these are released, is the need for the POS gone? Will they get removed when refineries are released? Will there be some sort of grace period? What about POS stuff on the market, or in hangars?
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
|

Tetsel
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
307
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:08:42 -
[81] - Quote
Querns wrote:Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx Here's a relevant quote from Fozzie: CCP Fozzie [23:52] more people have asked me about siphons in the last hour than have used siphons in the past week :slightly_smiling_face:
Nice job "Useless" CSM....
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel
Another Bittervet Please Ignore
|

Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
99
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:09:51 -
[82] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:RIP alliance srp for small-medium size alliances (not like free ships did anything in the way of content anyways, right guys?)
I'm curious how alliances even with only 4-5 systems that have 4-6 moons each are expected to mine all that , good luck getting a bunch of pvpers to get in a mining fleet.
Maybe reduce overall amount of moons but making per moon income much higher?
100x this, it's been the topic of our alliance Slack discussion since this dropped.
For those that find a way to make this work I really feel sorry for you. CCP is adding new game play requirements to the least engaging portion of the game -- mining. So now if I'm a miner I have to do the dullest portion of the game for personal income + mine for the alliance constantly. Even if I don't mine for personal income you're going to have alliances levying a mining requirement on their PVE/PVPers because the alliance has to have income to survive.
Nearly all small and many medium sized alliances will never be able to meet the demands this will place on them. With the loss of alliance level income comes the death of the alliance. No income means no SRP or Infrastructure. The alliances die and all that is left if a few mega alliances running the entire null-sec map.
I thought the entire point of tearing down the old SOV system was to break up the big alliances and allow the little guys a chance to thrive. This change throws all of that out the window. Bad call CCP, horrible job CSM!!! |

Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2748
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:06 -
[83] - Quote
Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy.
In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle.
However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2748
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:54 -
[84] - Quote
Rainus Max wrote:Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one? Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon.
Oh no, you may need to have infrastructure. Heaven forbid!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|

SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:11:58 -
[85] - Quote
Tetsel wrote:CCPls: What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ? What about Siphons ?
Thx
Sucking is apparently not a bad thing. |

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:17:07 -
[86] - Quote
Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote:Querns wrote:Rainus Max wrote: Give each moon a bit of everything but so that everyone has the ability to get the high end goo that currently is so heavily controlled by the big alliances.
Considering that the new system requires active harvest, I'm guessing a LOT of R64 moons, especially in lowsec, are about to come up for grabs, considering that they're mostly held by On-Rails-Arcade-Shooter-phile iceberg alliances currently. Perhaps you and yours can snag one? Given it also requires me to either ninja mine from someone else's belt or to drop a refinery of my own i doubt I'll get much or ever get on top of Dyspro moon any time soon. Oh no, you may need to have infrastructure. Heaven forbid!
Its not the need for infrastructure that is the issue, its defending it from large entities like Goons & PL etc that can dominate most other entities. |
|

CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
14795

|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:18:44 -
[87] - Quote
Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
|
|

SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:20 -
[88] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey folks. Thanks for the feedback and questions so far! I'll be doing a larger Q&A response at a later time but for now one quick answer to a question that's coming up a lot:
We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.
Wait, what? Sucking IS a bad thing? Dang 
On the bright side, I can see the point. |

Lunarstorm95
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas. Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:26 -
[89] - Quote
Querns wrote:Hy Wanto Destroyer wrote:Also mr retardo goon ofc you are pushing for this because it prolly benefits goons massively and alot of nullsec allainces , youre able to tax moons and tax renters so all the nullsec miners are jumping with joy. In strictly money-making terms, no, I'd much rather have passive moon mining. It's much, much easier to handle. However, I still support these changes. Speaking as someone who has, historically, benefited the most from passive alliance-level income, it MUST be removed.
Im interested in what a goon has to say about this, how does a med/small alliance that doesn't have a full mining wing expected to mine several moons, enough to keep up with SRP and infrastructure/fuel cost?
Alliances like goons are gana benefit so much from this patch, you can hardly say "Even I, a goon, think this should happen"
GÇ£You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once.GÇ¥
GÇò Robert A. Heinlein
"Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance."
GÇò Confucius-á
|

Sassums
Repo Industries
137
|
Posted - 2017.03.22 17:20:28 -
[90] - Quote
So if I am reading this correctly you are continuing to cater to the null sec folks while WH people receive no love.
T3 was our only production option in WH space that didnt require us to leave the WH to produce - with gas reaction BPO's requiring Ice products we will now either have to go out to HS to purchase said ice or roll until we find a shattered that has ice belts (that will almost always guarantee a gank)
T3 Production should continue to be a W-Space product and should not require K-Space components.
If this is changing then W-Space should be allowed to harvest resources from the moons of the systems we inhabit.
If not - remove the stupid ice requirement from T3 reactions. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |