Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tahna Rouspel
BWE Special Forces
71
|
Posted - 2012.02.18 22:55:00 -
[151] - Quote
That was a very nice interview. You sound decent.
About ABC's - wormholes are always dangerous, no matter what class wormhole you're in. The difference between C1 and C6 is the size of the group that lives there. Over-all though, ABC isn't worth enough to be made rare. Mining ABC is still lousy income and there's no reason to remove it from low class wormhole.
Using your argument about Ice; having miners in low class wormhole gives us targets to kill. If there weren't any ABC, people probably wouldn't bother. |
Endeavour Starfleet
646
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 05:08:00 -
[152] - Quote
Can you state here your views on incursions and if you are willing to defend them as part of CSM 7 against efforts of major nerfing in the future? |
Rei Seiji
Production N Destruction INC. The Last Chancers.
3
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 11:35:00 -
[153] - Quote
Tahna Rouspel wrote:That was a very nice interview. You sound decent.
About ABC's - wormholes are always dangerous, no matter what class wormhole you're in. The difference between C1 and C6 is the size of the group that lives there. Over-all though, ABC isn't worth enough to be made rare. Mining ABC is still lousy income and there's no reason to remove it from low class wormhole.
Using your argument about Ice; having miners in low class wormhole gives us targets to kill. If there weren't any ABC, people probably wouldn't bother.
Kind of silly and horribly risky to mine in even C1 wormholes, seeing how there isn't the early warning system of Local handy. |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1278
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 13:02:00 -
[154] - Quote
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Can you state here your views on incursions and if you are willing to defend them as part of CSM 7 against efforts of major nerfing in the future?
I think that highsec Vanguard sites are too easy for the amount of ISK they pay out. I ran incursions with some corp-mates when they first came out, and even then, the sites were clearly too easy.
I'd also like to see some sort of incentive to actually end the incursions, not to prolong them as long as possible. It doesn't make sense that people delay ending the sansha invasion, which is supposedly kidnapping people from planets and whatnot, and CONCORD just pays people to not finish it.
I would also like to see the payouts for lowsec incursions raised. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
Tahna Rouspel
BWE Special Forces
73
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 13:25:00 -
[155] - Quote
Rei Seiji wrote:Tahna Rouspel wrote:That was a very nice interview. You sound decent.
About ABC's - wormholes are always dangerous, no matter what class wormhole you're in. The difference between C1 and C6 is the size of the group that lives there. Over-all though, ABC isn't worth enough to be made rare. Mining ABC is still lousy income and there's no reason to remove it from low class wormhole.
Using your argument about Ice; having miners in low class wormhole gives us targets to kill. If there weren't any ABC, people probably wouldn't bother. Kind of silly and horribly risky to mine in even C1 wormholes, seeing how there isn't the early warning system of Local handy.
I don't disagree. I think mining in Gravimetric sites is safer than doing anomalies since you get a chance to see the probes on d scan. Mining for me is personally a waste of time, however, there's a few people in my corp that had already trained mining skills to fly hulk and sometimes they like to lay back and do some mining. From my calculation, the best income you can get from mining Arkanor is around 40mil/hour - it's much lower than the 80mil/hour I get soloing C2 sites.
However, removing ABC would reduce the profitability to Highsec level, but with wormhole danger. So please keep ABC in C1-2-3-4-5-6 and add a wormhole specific refinery that is affected by refining skills so that we don't have to haul the stuff back to K-space to refine it :/ |
Liastr
Event Horizon Expeditionaries The Watchmen.
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 15:51:00 -
[156] - Quote
Two-step, I no longer live in W-Space, but I wholeheartedly agree that it is one of the most fun, well balanced and challenging parts of EVE. Although I'm wary of the already discussed transgressions of your corp, I believe that W-Space absolutely needs representation in the CSM and that you are the best of the candidates that are running on this platform. Having read some of your blog and followed some discussions here, I do believe your heart is in the right space (see what I did there?) and that we share a number of important ideologies. You will have my vote.
Two step wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Can you state here your views on incursions and if you are willing to defend them as part of CSM 7 against efforts of major nerfing in the future? I think that highsec Vanguard sites are too easy for the amount of ISK they pay out. I ran incursions with some corp-mates when they first came out, and even then, the sites were clearly too easy. I'd also like to see some sort of incentive to actually end the incursions, not to prolong them as long as possible. It doesn't make sense that people delay ending the sansha invasion, which is supposedly kidnapping people from planets and whatnot, and CONCORD just pays people to not finish it. I would also like to see the payouts for lowsec incursions raised.
I think a relatively simple fix (and I think this should be applied to all PvE...) is to remove bounty payouts from re-spawning ships. Re-spawns are obviously designed to reset the site should someone fail to finish it, however given that the most lucrative part of most PvE plexes/missions/etc is in the last room and in drops associated with the last rat(s), the incentive is already there to finish the site. I could write an essay on this, but I find Walls of Text seem to scare a lot of people off giving their 2c.
tl;dr I haven't heard any compelling arguments against removing bounties from re-spawned rats.
On another note, I agree wholeheartedly on the randomization of ALL PvE encounters, preferably to an increasing extent relative to the difficulty of the encounter. I find it somewhat suspicious and a little bit crap that this isn't already in place. Similar to the above, I have heard no compelling arguments as to why this is not a good idea. |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1281
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 16:23:00 -
[157] - Quote
Liastr wrote:Two-step, I no longer live in W-Space, but I wholeheartedly agree that it is one of the most fun, well balanced and challenging parts of EVE. Although I'm wary of the already discussed transgressions of your corp, I believe that W-Space absolutely needs representation in the CSM and that you are the best of the candidates that are running on this platform. Having read some of your blog and followed some discussions here, I do believe your heart is in the right space ( see what I did there?) and that we share a number of important ideologies. You will have my vote. Two step wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Can you state here your views on incursions and if you are willing to defend them as part of CSM 7 against efforts of major nerfing in the future? I think that highsec Vanguard sites are too easy for the amount of ISK they pay out. I ran incursions with some corp-mates when they first came out, and even then, the sites were clearly too easy. I'd also like to see some sort of incentive to actually end the incursions, not to prolong them as long as possible. It doesn't make sense that people delay ending the sansha invasion, which is supposedly kidnapping people from planets and whatnot, and CONCORD just pays people to not finish it. I would also like to see the payouts for lowsec incursions raised. I think a relatively simple fix (and I think this should be applied to all PvE...) is to remove bounty payouts from re-spawning ships. Re-spawns are obviously designed to reset the site should someone fail to finish it, however given that the most lucrative part of most PvE plexes/missions/etc is in the last room and in drops associated with the last rat(s), the incentive is already there to finish the site. I could write an essay on this, but I find Walls of Text seem to scare a lot of people off giving their 2c. tl;dr I haven't heard any compelling arguments against removing bounties from re-spawned rats. On another note, I agree wholeheartedly on the randomization of ALL PvE encounters, preferably to an increasing extent relative to the difficulty of the encounter. I find it somewhat suspicious and a little bit crap that this isn't already in place. Similar to the above, I have heard no compelling arguments as to why this is not a good idea.
Thanks for your support!
I'm not sure how that solves anything in this case. Incursion rats don't pay bounties, you get rewarded for finishing a site.
I do agree with more randomness, PVE is far too easy in EVE. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
doombreed52
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
27
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 18:29:00 -
[158] - Quote
To make the highsecers kill the mom fast constt. Turned to lowsec no cnyo jam weeee hotdrop. |
Rei Seiji
Production N Destruction INC. The Last Chancers.
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 21:31:00 -
[159] - Quote
Long post gets eaten by glitch? Well... damn. |
Bam Stroker
InterSun Freelance Moon Warriors
11
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 22:50:00 -
[160] - Quote
I'm Bam Stroker, and I endorse this message. |
|
Tahna Rouspel
BWE Special Forces
75
|
Posted - 2012.02.19 23:50:00 -
[161] - Quote
Rei Seiji wrote:To summarize:
I disagree with just adding a random factor to encounters and missions to add difficulty considering that if you ignore the existence of such sites as Eve-Survival, said encounters are already horrendously difficult with high damage and the potential of way too many nasty red things showing up to shoot that newb cluelessly shooting pirates or sleepers.
Randomness would be nice so that someone can't just turn to a guide to tell him what to do, and more importantly doesn't need to let someone else essentially do the mission for him. But just making things more difficult doesn't make it more interesting.
I would like to propose that k-space encounters have aggro mechanics added to them (You'd think that the pirates would, by now, have learned that maybe they should stop shooting that impossible to kill but barely damaging droneboat, and instead target the drones).
I would also propose that instead of having set triggers, that every so often a random NPC ship would stop and begin transmitting a distress signal. If the player doesn't blow it up in time, they get a few more reds added to the list.
Finally, I would like to propose that Sleepers be able to adapt to the situation. As in if a non-engaged Sleeper comes to the conclusion that it and its buddies brought the wrong tools to this fight, it shuts down momentarily, the ship itself gets visually altered to provide more attentive a hint that it wasn't quite the same drone it was before, and then resumes fighting with an altered weapons setup.
How about having different spawns depending on the ship brought to the site? Doing a Sleeper site in a tech 3 is a lot easier than doing it in a Harbinger. The goal isn't to make the site impossible to do, but to make them a bit more challenging for high up ships.
As for Missions, they were pretty challenging to do when I had low skill levels. If something is done about their difficulty, please keep the newbie in mind .
|
Bent Barrel
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.20 13:03:00 -
[162] - Quote
Hmm ... no clue about wormholes yet (but soonTM). However a friend of mine was in AHARM for a time, he nejoyed the stay.
I guess this was already talked over and it's an old thing, but my favourite EVE video is the R&K one against AHARM. Particularly the tracking exploit. Have you learned anything from the incident or what is your current view on similar exploit uses ? |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1298
|
Posted - 2012.02.20 14:26:00 -
[163] - Quote
Bent Barrel wrote:Hmm ... no clue about wormholes yet (but soonTM). However a friend of mine was in AHARM for a time, he nejoyed the stay.
I guess this was already talked over and it's an old thing, but my favourite EVE video is the R&K one against AHARM. Particularly the tracking exploit. Have you learned anything from the incident or what is your current view on similar exploit uses ?
http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2011/03/infinite-tracking-wtf.html covers my side of things, it was a lot more complicated than the R&K video made it out to be.
I think we all learned something from it, which is to stay far away from anything that even seems like it might be sketchy. Since then, we have reported several exploits/bugs that we have found, and refrained from using them ourselves. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
doombreed52
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.20 19:09:00 -
[164] - Quote
Two step wrote:http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2011/03/infinite-tracking-wtf.html covers my side of things, it was a lot more complicated than the R&K video made it out to be. I think we all learned something from it, which is to stay far away from anything that even seems like it might be sketchy. Since then, we have reported several exploits/bugs that we have found, and refrained from using them ourselves.
a wise decision also on what you said early with a "static wormhole, do you mean a wormhole that never despawns maybe it changes where it leads every DT if its not a k162 on the inside it would change where it would spawn on the other side or do you mean to make it stay in the spot connecting two systems together forever? |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1303
|
Posted - 2012.02.20 20:24:00 -
[165] - Quote
doombreed52 wrote:Two step wrote:http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2011/03/infinite-tracking-wtf.html covers my side of things, it was a lot more complicated than the R&K video made it out to be. I think we all learned something from it, which is to stay far away from anything that even seems like it might be sketchy. Since then, we have reported several exploits/bugs that we have found, and refrained from using them ourselves. a wise decision also on what you said early with a "static wormhole, do you mean a wormhole that never despawns maybe it changes where it leads every DT if its not a k162 on the inside it would change where it would spawn on the other side or do you mean to make it stay in the spot connecting two systems together forever?
Every wormhole has one (or in Class 2 wormholes, two) "static" wormholes. These are wormholes, that when closed, will respawn. They always lead to the same class of wormhole or to high/low/nullsec. http://staticmapper.com is one public source of the statics for a given wormhole. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
Bent Barrel
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 12:24:00 -
[166] - Quote
Two step wrote:Bent Barrel wrote:Hmm ... no clue about wormholes yet (but soonTM). However a friend of mine was in AHARM for a time, he nejoyed the stay.
I guess this was already talked over and it's an old thing, but my favourite EVE video is the R&K one against AHARM. Particularly the tracking exploit. Have you learned anything from the incident or what is your current view on similar exploit uses ? http://twostep4csm.blogspot.com/2011/03/infinite-tracking-wtf.html covers my side of things, it was a lot more complicated than the R&K video made it out to be. I think we all learned something from it, which is to stay far away from anything that even seems like it might be sketchy. Since then, we have reported several exploits/bugs that we have found, and refrained from using them ourselves.
Good answer :-) you are close to getting my vote ... now I need to combine a hard working and honest CSM candidate and some linux support (at least a bit of wine testing on CCP side proposal) and I have my candidate. |
doombreed52
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
28
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 14:34:00 -
[167] - Quote
no two step i mean literally static as in you dont have to scan that wh down if you have scanned it down before. at least thats what i understood from your post a few pages ago about class 7s and the like. |
Chitsa Jason
High Intellion Exhale.
76
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 14:47:00 -
[168] - Quote
Two Step what do you think about easier way to tag targets? Like a keyboard shortcut? |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1331
|
Posted - 2012.02.21 15:02:00 -
[169] - Quote
doombreed52 wrote:no two step i mean literally static as in you dont have to scan that wh down if you have scanned it down before. at least thats what i understood from your post a few pages ago about class 7s and the like.
I'm sorry, I don't understand what you are asking. Static wormholes appear in a new place in space when closed.
Chitsa Jason wrote:Two Step what do you think about easier way to tag targets? Like a keyboard shortcut?
I am hopeful this will be added sometime soon. CCP is certainly aware that the current system is less than ideal. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1346
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 02:41:00 -
[170] - Quote
Andski wrote:there has not been sufficient discussion re: homemade maple syrup
Maple syrup update: First batch is done, 1/2 gallon of syrup is done. Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
|
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1346
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 03:07:00 -
[171] - Quote
I just got an endorsement from Ripard Teg, the author of Jester's Trek, http://jestertrek.blogspot.com/2012/02/wabbit-season.html.
He said:
Quote: Two Step, more than any other member of CSM5 or CSM6, demonstrates the fundamental correctness of Mynxee's goal of making the so-called "alternate" members of the CSM part of the process. Barely elected to CSM6 at all and dismissed as a wormhole specialty candidate, Two Step showed that he didn't really know or care what the word "alternate" meant. He simply did the work. More than any other single member of CSM6, he has been visible to the EVE Online player base in a variety of places, and has shown interest in multiple play-styles, not just his own. Two Step still represents an important segment of the EVE player base, but I'd now argue that it's larger than simply wormhole dwellers... it's every EVE player that has no interest in sovereignty-based play and super-cap blobs. Two Step deserves a full seat at the table in CSM7, and will be a terrific balance against these powerful forces. Two Step not only has my endorsement, he'll be receiving at least one of my votes.
Thanks for the kind words, Jester! Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
czMulti
Posthuman Society
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 11:56:00 -
[172] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:Two Step what do you think about easier way to tag targets? Like a keyboard shortcut?
That. I. Hate. Tagging.
|
Alexander Manu
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 13:22:00 -
[173] - Quote
Spent a long time in that frontier space till life got in the way. Two step, you have done some great things keeping wormholes on CCP's mind. Would like to see you keep doing that.
When those voting starts, you have my votes.
Keep up the good work there. |
Mr LaForge
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 17:52:00 -
[174] - Quote
Since I now have a guy in a WH I'll be voting for Two step. Stuff Goes here |
raker
Imperial Collective
14
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 18:31:00 -
[175] - Quote
Wormhole space is often an overlooked and misunderstood part of eve. Personally I view it as the most dangerous part of eve and in many ways it is like the old 0.0 space, before all blue area's and vast allainces
This part of the game does need a voice in the Csm that understands how it works
Two Step gets my vote, keep the good work up fella |
Starbuck Raider
Inter Arma Dead On Arrival Alliance
31
|
Posted - 2012.02.22 23:55:00 -
[176] - Quote
Dead on Arrival Alliance supports Two Step for CSM 7.
|
Nathan Jameson
Talocan Dominion Talocan United
292
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 04:32:00 -
[177] - Quote
Two step wrote:Andski wrote:there has not been sufficient discussion re: homemade maple syrup Maple syrup update: First batch is done, 1/2 gallon of syrup is done.
Have you thought about marketing authentic "Two step" brand maple syrup for the rest of us? |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
1369
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 12:14:00 -
[178] - Quote
Thanks for all the support!
Nathan Jameson wrote:Two step wrote:Andski wrote:there has not been sufficient discussion re: homemade maple syrup Maple syrup update: First batch is done, 1/2 gallon of syrup is done. Have you thought about marketing authentic "Two step" brand maple syrup for the rest of us?
Sadly, I don't think I make enough. My best year, I only get 2 gallons of syrup. Last year, I did offer some to AHARM, with this label
Pics of my first batch Vote Two step for CSM 7 CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog |
Abbadon Karis
Aperture Harmonics K162
8
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 20:11:00 -
[179] - Quote
Andski wrote: Have you thought about marketing authentic "Two step" brand maple syrup for the rest of us?
If you buy his syrup you better vote for hims as well is my only advice in this case, or else it might taste suspiciously salt for some odd reasons I don't wanna go into
Anyways you have my votes this year as well bud, don't see that coming to you as a shocker after designing your propaganda posters. On a serious note I must admit this guy is gonna burn himself out at some point, a more dedicated man to this game is rare to find. Go Two Step! |
Revolution Rising
Gentlemen of Better Ilk
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 20:28:00 -
[180] - Quote
Some friends of mine and I are just moving into wormholes, but personally I'm also after a serious ******* industry iteration.
What are your thoughts on that?
As you can see I'm harassing the **** out of Seleene on the same issues, but I will either split my votes or give them to one of the two of you as I find you both to be the most worthy of the CSM candidates presently.
So be specific ;)
(Not that I don't want all sectors of eve iterated upon, but WH and indy need some serious attention now).
Manufacturing Papercuts ***CSM Interstellar Debate - Mining Profession**
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |