| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:06:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Reto on 09/12/2007 00:08:37 is there a reasoning behind it? atm its hard to ferry the turrets i need to build a bc from a station to another with a destroyer. i used to buy stuff and pick it up via des in order to have all my stuff in the same place but somehow 100m¦ for med turrets kinda freak me out. why was this implemented?
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:23:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Reto on 09/12/2007 00:24:23
Originally by: Krazy Bitsch
Originally by: Reto Edited by: Reto on 09/12/2007 00:08:37 is there a reasoning behind it? atm its hard to ferry the turrets i need to build a bc from a station to another with a destroyer. i used to buy stuff and pick it up via des in order to have all my stuff in the same place but somehow 100m¦ for med turrets kinda freak me out. why was this implemented?
use a hauler?
the point in using a destroyer is to save time as this ship is faster and more agile. another point is that u not always have 2 ships in one place. and the last thing i thought anbout is the npc loot thing. how can i do missions in reasonable time if i have to make cargo runs for 2 hours during a single mission in order to secure my precious loot? im playing 2 hours a day max. and atm eve has become more of a work situation than a playing situation for me. its not reasonable to think thateveryone can spend 5 hours a day infornt of their pcs to play eve just to get the stuff together to actually have fun isnt it?
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:26:00 -
[3]
btw was there any feedback of the devs on this matter. i would like to hear their opinions why this was implemented. i want to understand the whole issue instead of simply bragging about it.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:33:00 -
[4]
Originally by: SiJira mineral prices have been slated to go up ever since it was announced
im not going to explain the market to you
u mean ccp wants to increase the cost of minerals by making loot too big for transport and reprocessing?
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:39:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Krazy Bitsch
Originally by: Reto
Originally by: SiJira mineral prices have been slated to go up ever since it was announced
im not going to explain the market to you
u mean ccp wants to increase the cost of minerals by making loot too big for transport and reprocessing?
and giving miners a role again? Heaven forbid!!!!!
i have the strong feeling the discussing of this issue makes u angry in some sort. i am asking questions here since i want to understand this decision, i dont want to begin a dispute about whats good and whats bad for the game. please refrain from posting if u feel attcked by the cometns posted here. this doent help ppl to get a picture of the whole backround of this decision.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 00:56:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Abrazzar The module size adjustment was meant to nerf the mineral compression of some modules. People build modules hauled them and reprocessed them again to haul larger quantities of minerals than they could have normally. The compression factor of some modules was so high that ccp decided to increase the size of almost all T1 modules. The side effects may or may not be intentional.
i just read about this issue in another thread in general discussion. i wasnt aware that mineral compression was such a big problem. i think that reducing the mineral amouts u get via reprocessing would have been a better aproch tho, as i tend to loot the bigger modules and resell them (gun turrets, mwds, etc.) i guess this has to do with the new rorqual. ccp implemented something new to the game but the game already offered a unintented way of mineral compression so they had to blance this out. but while doing so created some new big problems for various player groups like pirates, ratters and missionrunners.
i hope u devs read this discussion and take this problem into consideration.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 01:09:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Originally by: SnakeByte86
Originally by: Abrazzar The module size adjustment was meant to nerf the mineral compression of some modules. People build modules hauled them and reprocessed them again to haul larger quantities of minerals than they could have normally. The compression factor of some modules was so high that ccp decided to increase the size of almost all T1 modules. The side effects may or may not be intentional.
They could have just adjusted minerals needed to build some modules. Problem solved.
Make an arbitrary bunch of modules then times cheaper to make to solve an unrelated problem?
I'm glad you don't balance EVE...
i think the amout of minerals u put into a mod to build it should be a lot bigger than the amout u get out of reprocessing. its logical that recycling isnt able to facilate all of the materials used and maybe even wasted during manufactoring. making modules require less minerals for building would skyrocket the price inflation in eve, which is alsobad in the end.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 01:41:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Mohia Matara What modules have increased in size? All ones that i've looked for are the same volume on my end.
medium gun turrets for example are now 100m¦in size.
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|

Reto
The Last Resort
|
Posted - 2007.12.09 13:58:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Mohia Matara
Originally by: Reto
Originally by: Mohia Matara What modules have increased in size? All ones that i've looked for are the same volume on my end.
medium gun turrets for example are now 100m¦in size.
You sure about that? Their comming up at 10.0 on mine.
i noticed it when opening my turretcan in my hangar it had 970m¦ while only 780 can be filled in. i checked the medium laser turrets and they showed a volume of 100m¦
Originally by: s4mp3r0r "Hey man, you're mom has a cruise missile".
|
| |
|