|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3159
|
Posted - 2017.06.08 19:30:19 -
[1] - Quote
JC Mieyli wrote:increase material cost and lower bpc means less availability for pirate bs this means all the industrialists get to build pirate bs early and stockpile screws over the young industiralist again
how about for once instead of increasing cost to benefit veteran industrialist try lowering the cost of everything else to help the young industrialist and screw the rich fatcat players would be niceto see this happen for a change
Yes, if something is broken, it definitely makes sense to change the entire universe to correct that, instead of just fixing the one thing that is broken.
We'd be lost without your keen insight.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3159
|
Posted - 2017.06.08 19:45:16 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
In June we are starting to address the supply of pirate battleship BPCs, with moderate changes to the chance of escalations spawning from the most popular high-end anomalies and larger changes to the drop rates of the BPCs themselves from quite a few NPCs.
This would also impact the availability of deadspace modules.
Is this intended (or, at least, considered to be acceptable collateral damage)? Or will drop rates for the mods be adjusted to compensate?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3159
|
Posted - 2017.06.08 21:10:38 -
[3] - Quote
Vash Bloodstone wrote:Something about this rubs me the wrong way.
I haven't played a lot recently, but why is this proliferation of pirate battleships considered a problem? Maybe someone can clarify for me?
Sure.
Quote:Are there too many gangs of pirate battleships roaming around?
Gangs? Try mainline fleet doctrines. T1 and navy BS have been almost completely supplanted by pirate BS.
Do you really not see why that's a problem?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3161
|
Posted - 2017.06.08 23:56:46 -
[4] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Vash Bloodstone wrote:Something about this rubs me the wrong way.
I haven't played a lot recently, but why is this proliferation of pirate battleships considered a problem? Maybe someone can clarify for me? Sure. Quote:Are there too many gangs of pirate battleships roaming around? Gangs? Try mainline fleet doctrines. T1 and navy BS have been almost completely supplanted by pirate BS. Do you really not see why that's a problem? T1 BS are shite in comparison, which IS the problem. If there was a viable alternative for the Mach it wouldn't automatically be the go to. As for Navy versions, being LP based as soon as one sees more than average use the price goes up to match and demand will always outstrip supply. Napocs were a thing but got priced out of usefulness.. Making pirate ships cost more isn't going to "fix" any problems - Those who can afford them will still use them, those who can't or don't want to spend the extra will keep complaining - Devs will keep increasing costs and reducing supply until they once again become a rarely used niche class of ships.
It's supposed to be the case that those who can afford/feel they're worth it use them. Those who don't will use something cheaper. That isn't a problem, especially when the general premise is linear power gains for exponential increases in cost.
The problem is that, right now, the list of people who can afford them and feel they're worth it is... basically everyone, because the pricing, at present, offers linear power gains for linear increases in cost.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3164
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 06:04:21 -
[5] - Quote
NightmareX wrote:Let's say that the Machariel goes from 400 to like 600-650 mill isk. If that happens, i wont care. If the Machariel goes from 400 to 800 mill - 1 bill isk, i will be angry about that.
A Machariel and Rattlesnake is the 2 main Battleships i use now, so it would be bad to let them be super expensive.
Really? It would be bad to let them be super expensive (if we're really calling a billion super-expensive)?
Objectively bad, or just bad for you?
Maybe poors should use something else for their "main" battleships?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3164
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 06:21:15 -
[6] - Quote
JC Mieyli wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Maybe poors should use something else for their "main" battleships? like a t3c you mean what other alternatives are there anyway judging by your replies in this thread and looking at your corp name seems like youre one of the people this change is gonna benefit
Believe it or not, there are a dozen (!) other battleships in the 150-200M price range, and 8 more in the 3-400M price range, that aren't directly affected by these changes.
Maybe try some of those.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3164
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 06:31:47 -
[7] - Quote
JC Mieyli wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:JC Mieyli wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Maybe poors should use something else for their "main" battleships? like a t3c you mean what other alternatives are there anyway judging by your replies in this thread and looking at your corp name seems like youre one of the people this change is gonna benefit Believe it or not, there are a dozen (!) other battleships in the 150-200M price range, and 8 more in the 3-400M price range, that aren't directly affected by these changes. Maybe try some of those. no thanks theyre garbage reprocess fodder
That's the thing - they're really not, except they're basically in the same price-class as pirate BS and, in that context, they provide very poor value/price:performance.
Compare this to cruisers, where a popular pirate hull like the Gila is about 25x the cost of a popular T1 hull like the Caracal or Vexor.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3167
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 15:43:05 -
[8] - Quote
Jehle wrote:This is ********. Why mess with the "player run" economy at all?
Because it's actually a simulated economy and, unlike a real economy, there's an effectively limitless influx of new resources instead of a finite amount of material in the universe and, consequently, the flow rate of this influx periodically requires management.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3169
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 19:12:07 -
[9] - Quote
Kay Bold wrote:Once again ccp pandering to Null cry babies
Really, you think this is at the request of null pilots?
The ones fielding machs as mainline doctrines?
Really?
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
|
|