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) |
Bussan
Kabukicho
27
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:16:12 -
[241] - Quote
The new moon mining system sounds interesting and fun, but there will be some quite big problems about it...
The main one is that you move something from a completely automatic and unattended system to a very active one. It means that nearly all the moons that are haversted now, will become unused. Why? Because most of the moongoo is made from big alliances, whith hundreds of POSes around null. After the changes, they will only keep the most valuable ones, as much as they can actually keep mining every week (or whatever the settings will be). All the other moons will be freed. This will lead to a very big rebalance of T2 prices, as the available moongoo in the hubs will be a LOT less than now.
Moreover the basic system will remain the same... few big alliances will own 80% of the moongoo market (talking about value, not quantity).
In order to make things more interesting and open to as many players as possible, few changes would imho be important:
1. Every moon should have way more kinds of moongoo.
Maybe not all the kinds of moongoo, but something like the PI materials distribution on planets.... maybe keeping max 1 r64 per moon, 1-2 r32, and so on... and a total of 5-8 different types on every moon, The materials should be random, included the quantity, but could be tied to "moon type" and true sec. A little bit like the ore belts.
2. Open the moon mining to HS and WH.
In LS it's actually quite hard to mine... in Null the mined moons will be a lot less than now... and the alliances will focus on the best ones... So we will need a way to have enough low-end moongoo, not to completely crash the market. Following my suggestion #1, in HS it would be possible to mine mostly low-med end materials, with small quantities of higher ones. In WH it should be possible to get the same ones as in null... but most of the people living in WH won't mine them anyway. At least, having the chance of doing it would be an improvement to the gameplay, wouldn't ruin anything. And at least it would give some value for these structures in HS... the way they are now, they can only be used to refine ores. |
Pestilen Ratte
Artimus Ratte
75
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:37:50 -
[242] - Quote
I have taken time to reflect on these changes.
More mining. Really?
Really, CCP?
You think the way to move the game forward is to spend vast numbers of man hours....... giving us more mining?
But it isn't really "more", is it? We don't get anything new out of this. No new ships. No new modules with new mechanics that effect combat.
It is a skin change on the already existing mining mechanic.
That's it.
That is, frankly, incredibly lazy and arrogant conduct by the directors responsible. If you turned in that kind of work, for that budget of time and treasure, at my company, I would sack you with no comment.
It is massive, open show of disrespect by the directors at CCP. they have stopped worked and downed tools.
The owner wants to sell and the directors have gone militant and downed tools.
Fascinating stuff.
|
twoflower Secret
Federation Star Invention
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 07:46:10 -
[243] - Quote
Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices). |
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
721
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:08:24 -
[244] - Quote
twoflower Secret wrote:Hi
Can you please look into fuel costs of the Citadels, a alarmingly growing number of Citadels in hi-sec (no experiences in low/null-sec) is not fueled and thus necessary services are not available. In the region I travel more than 50% of the citadels seems not fuelled at all.
Giving the fuel costs Citadels seems like a big money pit for most smaller corporations (<10 member). Low or no tax to attract customers for a refinery does not make it any better for the competition.
Please do a count of how much of the cited 7800 corps have one or more Citadels with only the free services running (repair/insurance/storage/offices).
I fully agree, the one in my home system put up by a largish corp The Night Crew is now unfuelled so no processing or compression.
It was always going to come down to the cost, and if large corps and alliances are letting them go dormant then there's no hope whatsoever for the smaller guys, unless they want to buy a plex a month just to keep one running, with a reasonable chance of a wardec and it being hit as well.
Now they want more expensive targets in space, well at least they'll be mainly in null because for the life of me I can't see a role for them in HS.
As for the mechanics surrounding moon goo when these go live, yeah I can agree with that, it's about time the major null blocks had to do some work to collect the isk they are used to getting afk.
Solecist Project...." They refuse to play by the rules and laws of the game and use it as excuse ..."
" They don't care about how you play as long as they get to play how they want."
Welcome to EVE.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
727
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:08:53 -
[245] - Quote
1. About what amount of ISKs we are talking with passive moon mining here, from a single moon? I'm glad that passive income will go away (burn it with fire!) but judging from Rorqual thread changes, our min-max community with as little effort as possible, I presume negative reception. 2. Refineries will have mining bonuses (mining ledger, moon mining, refine bounses) what will driling platforms have? 3. I'm kinda lost when it comes to citadels. We will have specialized structures soon, what is the purpose of "Citadels" when more specialized EC, Refineries, Drilling platforms and more will come? 4. POS - remove? when? Outposts--->Citadels, POS--->? 5. Economy earthquake (passive gathering into active) and how to avoid it?
"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
If you need a scout mail me.
|
Aspecter en Welle
Iris Covenant The Gorgon Empire
186
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 08:41:51 -
[246] - Quote
1. We will mine new types of ore with Moon materials. Will reprocessing skills affect the efficiency of reprocessing this ore? 2. Can i compress new tupes of moon ore? 2.1 Can i compress moon ore on Upwell Refinery Complex? 3. BIGGEST BOOMS! Chunk of the moon Iwill be beautiful to blow up? 4. Blueprints. Do i need to reseach moon, polymer and booster reactions BPOs? 4.1 Price for reacion BPOs? 5. Moon ore will give only moon materials or normal minerals too? Tritanium maybe
ex-RusEVERadio leader
Ireland - terrorists and guiness. Iceland - ice and Eve
|
Alexander Bor
Polaris Global
11
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:13:53 -
[247] - Quote
Nice job CCP. It's funny to watch how mechanisms being implemented pull players in conflict LOL) |
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:52:53 -
[248] - Quote
Lunarstorm95 wrote:John McCreedy wrote:My initial thoughts on these proposed changes are that it penalises small, specialised corporations and alliances whilst simultaneously making a lot easier for the larger alliances with support networks, either rental alliances or diversified memberships. More money going to the select few which exacerbates the problems in Eve.
My corporation has a modest moon mining operation. It pays the bills and limited SRP for our members. We are not rich to begin with and, being specialised as PvP, make less per month than your average incursion runner makes in a day. Similarly, our Alliance isn't big. like us it's specialised along PvP lines. We don't have copious amounts of Titans, our R64s pay for a modest SRP programme to help everyone enjoy doing what they do.
We now need to diversify and find miners. Miners aren't going to mine for nothing so our already modest income is going to take a significant hit. It means we become less attractive for players than larger alliances whose income will barely be affected with this proposed change. If lots of small, independant alliances go under and all Eve is left with is large power blocs, then the game stagnates which not only does that undermine what the new sov attempted to achieve but how is it possibly going to be healthy for the game.
I understand what you're trying to achieve here and I'm fully onboard with having more people in space, it's what the game's desperately needed for years now, but that has to be balanced against the harm you're going to do to those who don't want to be part of major power blocs. You need to find some way to shift the balance of income so it's spread out more evenly across a more diverse player base rather than trying to force square pegs into round holes. My point exactly, but its downed out by the random 3 man groups who now are super excited about grabbing there 1 money moon, while med sized alliance die over funding because we cant chuck 3/4 of our member base into mining fleets. Like in real life: you must support any activity you do. Or you find someone who will be interested enough in you to support your activity.
Why you believe that you must be able to do what you like 'pvp' and evade all of the game outside?
I do pvp a little and i never ask for SRP. I support it with other means of making ISK.
This is pretty good change. Especially if all your 'pvp-only alliance supported by afk ISK" will adapt. That's what the game is about.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
March rabbit
Mosquito Squadron The-Culture
2107
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 09:57:26 -
[249] - Quote
Hoshi wrote:Querns wrote:mkint wrote:Hooray, even stricter dividing lines between the mega-alliance-null-stagnation and the 90%-of-the-playerbase! Exactly what this game needed! The barriers of entry to go from difficult to impossible! awesome! So the large number of moons being freed up because of a need for active mining is somehow going to make "stagnation" worse? I do see a future where several of the large blocks like PL and Goons actively going around with their supers and killing drilling refineries just to stop others from gaining utilizing those moons that they don't want to use themselves. For some reason i think that they could do it already with POSes. But for some reason they do not ?
It's not that citadels are much easier to kill than POSes.
On the other hand POS does its job afk. You only visit it time by time to grab goo Active mining would be impossible far from your land. Thus many moons will be free.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Stella Southstar
Sagittarius Galactic Industries
5
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 10:21:49 -
[250] - Quote
Some ideas:
Divide moon elements per chunk of moon on a random basis with % probability skewed according to security, and drill times (size of the moon chunk)
So for example a null sec structure would get higher % chance for rare R64 whereas a Hisec structure would get a very very low chance to get R64 but could still happen in small quantities. Lowsec would sit some where in between.
These variables could be tweaked as required so as to not cause any upsets in the market.
Single moon asteroids would then yield a varied amount of elements in accordance to the probabilities above.
It would be nice to use moon probes to scan the moon after every cycle and redirect the beam to specific areas of the moon that are richer in one element as opposed to another. Similar to PI scanning at the moment.
The other variable is how long it would take to mine a complete field and the size of the field that is generated. Smaller chunks of moon should yield smaller fields which are faster to clear up but would give less possibility of getting rare elements.
Added thought:
I read in one of the comments before the idea of having automated bots/drones that can be enabled to mine. I don't think this is a good idea unless they are inefficient and could be siphoned. So an alliance/corp could allow automation but would get low yields and could leave the op open to be siphoned /attacked etc...
|
|
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services Singularity Syndicate
2121
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:04:44 -
[251] - Quote
Another concern I have:
How many of these structures do we see being destroyed to keep driving the market for production? I'm not thinking that big Null groups will be risking facilities on moons where there won't be enough miners to make it worthwhile, so there will be a finite number of moons populated with refineries. These will most likely be in pretty secure systems and therefore won't die very often.
It is unlikely that these structures will be operating in many other areas of space so I think it is a real concern that this will create a stagnant production market for these structures, whilst at the same time handing over pretty much all tech II materials production to null. |
Dark Lord Trump
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
441
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:06:25 -
[252] - Quote
So CCP: What stops me from anchoring, say, 5 refineries around a moon I want to keep? If you want it, you have to bash all 5 refineries, otherwise if you just bash the one with the drill I online my drill from another refinery before you get yours up. Oh, and their vuln hours are 1 hour apart to annoy you. It's going to be a huge pain to take that moon. Once I have it, if it's outside of my space there's not much I can do with it since I need people who will be willing to mine without backup. Mining ore worth twice as much isn't any good to me if I can't sell it because I die mining it. So I gain very little trying to push into someone else's space to get their moons. If you work really hard for little gain, you're going to be disincentivized to fight over moons. Why should we bother trying to take INIT moons if we get pretty much nothing out of it? Then we don't have epic battles with INIT, and that's bad.
I'm going to build a big wall that will keep the Gallente out, and they're going to pay for it!
|
D3athIsHere
Sector260
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:13:45 -
[253] - Quote
Quote:Each Refinery structure with an active moon drill will keep track of all the mining done in its associated belt, logging the character, corporation, ore type and amount mined. This will allow Refinery managers to share profits or request fees as they see fit, allow mining operations to more easily organize themselves, and allow corps and alliances to see who has been ninja-mining their fields without permission.
So ninja miners shall get found out and eventually killed off |
SonofSilence
Appetite 4 Destruction Appetite 4 Destruction.
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:27:20 -
[254] - Quote
Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft. |
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:40:51 -
[255] - Quote
Dark Lord Trump wrote:So CCP: What stops me from anchoring, say, 5 refineries around a moon I want to keep? If you want it, you have to bash all 5 refineries, otherwise if you just bash the one with the drill I online my drill from another refinery before you get yours up. Oh, and their vuln hours are 1 hour apart to annoy you. It's going to be a huge pain to take that moon. Once I have it, if it's outside of my space there's not much I can do with it since I need people who will be willing to mine without backup. Mining ore worth twice as much isn't any good to me if I can't sell it because I die mining it. So I gain very little trying to push into someone else's space to get their moons. If you work really hard for little gain, you're going to be disincentivized to fight over moons. Why should we bother trying to take INIT moons if we get pretty much nothing out of it? Then we don't have epic battles with INIT, and that's bad.
This is honestly a valid concern that CCP needs to address.
It may limit the freedom we've had with these structures so far, but only one refinery should be allowed within drilling range at any given time (like POSes are now). Not doing so will create the above scenario with 500% accuracy. Because people WILL spam 10 refineries on a single R64 moon just to bore the enemy to death.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:42:58 -
[256] - Quote
SonofSilence wrote:Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft.
EVE is still the hardest game I know, and if you had any notion of business whatsoever you'd know that PLEX and Free to Play are what kept this game alive and will keep it alive for the coming years.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2766
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:43:21 -
[257] - Quote
SonofSilence wrote:Since you took down my first post, I will repost.
CCP and Dev Team....QUIT GAYING UP EVE PLEASE. Thanks!
Get rid of plex and free to play.
EVE is supposed to be hard.
If you want easy, go play World of Warcraft.
Ooh, I gotta know -- why should CCP get rid of PLEX? :allears:
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1893
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 11:55:12 -
[258] - Quote
Oh, not entirely unimportant.
Please tell me that Rorquals will be able to dock in the large refinery? Even if its the only capital ship that is able to dock there, surely a capital ship that is designed for resource gathering should be able to dock at a refinery. CCPlease.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas Snuffed Out
72
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 12:57:27 -
[259] - Quote
A few things that made me cringe while thinking about it:
It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances It might bring us back to renter times of 2013 just that renter pay with moongoo instead of ISK. - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Conclusion: It clearly favors large entities over small ones which is a step back considering Aegis Sov and Phoebe Jump Drives. A small entity might not even be ready to defend their citadel after breaking ore out of the moon for long enough to mine the ore. A buff of Nullsec automatically carries a Nerf to everyone else, except WH because they never had moonmining and WHs are already quite strong in terms of Risk vs. Reward.
In my opinion, you have to do a lot of designing work to do @CCP. I just hope it doesn't stay like this, because in that stae it would ruin the game for a lot of players.
|
SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:01:10 -
[260] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:Oh, not entirely unimportant.
Please tell me that Rorquals will be able to dock in the large refinery? Even if its the only capital ship that is able to dock there, surely a capital ship that is designed for resource gathering should be able to dock at a refinery. CCPlease.
Maybe at the large structures, definitely not at the medium ones. |
|
Ben Ishikela
84
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:09:38 -
[261] - Quote
Quote:Once the chunk of moon rock has completed its journey into space, the Refinery can use its drill module to detonate the chunk into a minable asteroid field. The exact time of the detonation is controlled by the owners of the Refinery within limits. If the chunk is left unattended long enough it will disintegrate into the asteroid field on its own. Why the delay? I feel, that the Owner already scheduled the date with the teamminingcrew. So there was already a decision. If formup is bad or enemy is prepared, why should this state of boredom be prolonged? If it was immediately detonated upon impact, there is going to be a time of clash possible. The exact time that can be read by all. Yes, ok. You might want to give the owner some feeling of power and control. But in the end the only decision that comes out of this particular mechanic is: Just do it Wait and go to bed late this night while not doing anything more meaningful in eve this session.
So CCPLEASE make it immediate!!!
Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
388
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:20:14 -
[262] - Quote
I like the concept as it places more ships in space. Why not extend it further and promote ships in wormhole space as well. The manufactured belt content need not be moon goo. In the wormhole context it could be a low sec grade ice or ore belt and it would still achieve that aim. |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2767
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:29:39 -
[263] - Quote
h4kun4 wrote: It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now, in anticipation of this change. The signs have been there for years; you just have to think a little further out from where your next Level 5 mission or travelling supercap gank comes from.
From all the apoplectic posting here and from without, it seems like lowsec entities have the adaptability of my last bowel movement.
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
8
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:33:43 -
[264] - Quote
Querns wrote:h4kun4 wrote: It might kill SRP, especially of smaller entities or Lowsec entities. - Buff to large nullsec Alliances It might render Lowsec mooning pointless because seriously - who mines in Lowsec? - Buff to large nullsec alliances
Perhaps you should adapt? Our organization has been de-emphasizing the portion of our income that comes from moongoo for years now, in anticipation of this change. The signs have been there for years; you just have to think a little further out from where your next Level 5 mission or travelling supercap gank comes from. From all the apoplectic posting here and from without, it seems like lowsec entities have the adaptability of my last bowel movement.
It raises an interesting set of questions. Adaptation and innovation are always a necessity - but is it healthy if every player dynamic falls within the same guiding paths and ends up adopting the same kind of organisational model. I'm not so sure whether the underlying issue with the low sec people's responses is the passive isk dependancy, there may very well be much more to it in terms of having to become something they never wanted to be. Deliberately so. Granted, this too is a topic of adapting to changes, but it is also a topic of niche gameplay and connected choices.
|
sgtdale
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:34:54 -
[265] - Quote
the end of the pos is near |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2768
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:45:02 -
[266] - Quote
sgtdale wrote:the end of the pos is near
hail satan
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Edek Hawker
Serpent Sun Roadhouse Regulars
1
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:48:48 -
[267] - Quote
Sullen Decimus wrote:Locke Beulve wrote:Quote:The existing reactions will be converted to new blueprints that enable the reaction process in the new system, and new reactions will include small amounts of ice products in each run to compensate for the lower number of starbase towers needed for advanced industry. Whoaaaaaa there. Already ice products are required to be used to fuel these structures, which makes use of ice mats. There's no need to go overboard and make the fuel block prices skyrocket even more then they already are from shortages of Strontium. There is huge potential for these new structures, but lets not reinvent the wheel here. This will be absolutely necessary. You can now essentially do ALL of your reactions in a single structure. Without this a huge portion of the isotope demand in the game would die as one of the single largest consumers of isotopes is reaction farms.
Why are we trying to keep the price of ice products artificially high? All of the new structures if fully fitted use more fuel blocks than the POS equivalent of them. If we finally get a structure that uses less fuel than the POS equivalent then its about time! If you continue to insist that we need to keep the status quo on ice production then look to booster charges ice products had their buff there. Last but not least If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :) |
Querns
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2768
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:53:30 -
[268] - Quote
Edek Hawker wrote: If CCP only removes the ice products requirement from T3 reactions but leaves them on the rest I would be completely satisfied... see I can compromise. :)
Considering T3 reactions burn ice in the form of POS fuel currently, no, there's no chance that it would 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.
|
Dark Eulogy
Mortis Angelus Fidelas Constans
6
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:53:43 -
[269] - 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.
Hi CCP
I want to first say I think the Player Owned Structures have been great so far and I look forward to their next installment, and that I think these are progressing down a good road
However I want to talk about serious issue for a moment please, in relation to this post.... a dark issue
I see you look forward to Fan Fest Feedback and I think this is a great idea, however it has recently come to the attention of myself and others that a certain menacing force will be gathering at Fan fest, threatening those who disagree with them
It is even rumored that (some) of these menaces are 'legit ex cons'
I myself read that they will send players to the hospitals
Can you provide any guarantees that people who attend CCP events like Fan Fest are not threatened, accosted and end up in altercations with angry players who disagree with them
Thank you
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Northern Coalition.
1911
|
Posted - 2017.03.23 13:58:28 -
[270] - Quote
Sassums wrote: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.
care to elaborate how you can run gas reactions without pos fuel? |
|
|
|
|
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 |