| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Duvida
The Scope
Gallente Federation
60
   |
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was looking at the nerfs in mission and rat drops, and the mineral price increases and released that an important part of EVE, PVP was very much affected by replacement costs for equipment. If PVP'rs get starved because everything costs too much, will we lose a significant percentage of EVE players?  |
DonHel
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
no, we will just fly cheaper ships |
Jessie-A Tassik
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
54
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:15:00 -
[3] - Quote
Duvida wrote:I was looking at the nerfs in mission and rat drops, and the mineral price increases and released that an important part of EVE, PVP was very much affected by replacement costs for equipment. If PVP'rs get starved because everything costs too much, will we lose a significant percentage of EVE players?
Don't worry.
Null is going to be fine. |
Doc Fury
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
754
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Duvida wrote:I was looking at the nerfs in mission and rat drops, and the mineral price increases and released that an important part of EVE, PVP was very much affected by replacement costs for equipment. If PVP'rs get starved because everything costs too much, will we lose a significant percentage of EVE players?
No, they will simply adapt no differently then when other changes to the game have occurred.
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'no.' |
Fredfredbug4
Kings of Kill
EVE Animal Control
182
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
All it means is that the people flying battleships will start flying battlecruisers. If anything this is a positive change. We might start seeing less capital ships being used like battleships and more like the specialized game changers they were meant to be.
Hopefully people will one day stop saying "Oh look they have a titan" and instead say "HOLY **** THEY HAVE A TITAN" |
Annie Anomie
Shadows Of The Federation
Drunk 'n' Disorderly
19
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Higher ship cost isn't going to = less blobbing and caps. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
198
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
We throw away 100s of battleships at a time without blinking. Everyone has deadspace-fit faction battleships for ratting. There are 800 titans in the game. There are entire fleets of hundreds of T3s Eve was spiraling towards mudflation, and CCP actually had the balls and foresight to step up and stop it before it ruined the game.
This wasn't some random decision to make the game worse; it was a deliberate and considered decision to make the game better. |
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Caldari State Capturing
185
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:49:00 -
[8] - Quote
PvP with consequences, imagine that |
adopt
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
384
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:50:00 -
[9] - Quote
NO! CCP should not interfere, this is part of the sandbox, deal with it. If you don't like the increasing ship cost, go mine and reduce the problem instead of forum-warrioring and getting someone to do it for you.
Its not our fault you can't afford 200mil battleships, or 900mil T3s. Get better at EVE.
HTFU
Shadoo > Always remember to fit Cynosural Field Generator I, have 450 Liquid Ozone in your cargo and convo a friendly Pandemic Legion member if you have a capital or super capital ship tackled.
FREE XOLVE ~ THE HERO TEST NEEDS |
Vince Snetterton
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
58
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Darth Tickles wrote:We throw away 100s of battleships at a time without blinking. Everyone has deadspace-fit faction battleships for ratting. There are 800 titans in the game. There are entire fleets of hundreds of T3s Eve was spiraling towards mudflation, and CCP actually had the balls and foresight to step up and stop it before it ruined the game.
This wasn't some random decision to make the game worse; it was a deliberate and considered decision to make the game better.
When you say "we", you mean the null sec alliances, yes?
I don't see empire battles using fleets of T3's.
And guess what, null sec income is barely getting touched by the econ nerf.
They lose 10% bounties across the board, but gain hugely on minerals.
High sec gets hammered, except for the increased value of low end minerals.
As someone already said, don't worry, null sec will be just fine.
The rich null sec alliances just became more entrenched as NO ONE will be able to amass enough wealth to take them on. |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
199
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. |
gfldex
459
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 22:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
For a long time those corps that where actually good at the co-operation part could not compete with botters. Being well organised should matter - botting should not. What we see now is that dedication, cunning and skill will make a difference again, even before the fleets assemble. I can't really see why that could be bad for a highly competitive game.
When someone burns down your sandcaste, bring sausages. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
6012
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 23:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
GǪand anyway, the changes we've seen so far are mostly just speculation on what the long-term effects of the botnuking dronepoo revamp. One has only just begun to have even a slight effect; the other has yet to actually happen.
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Find more rants over at Tippis' Rants. |
Nub Sauce
State War Academy
Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 23:15:00 -
[14] - Quote
Duvida wrote:I was looking at the nerfs in mission and rat drops, and the mineral price increases and released that an important part of EVE, PVP was very much affected by replacement costs for equipment. If PVP'rs get starved because everything costs too much, will we lose a significant percentage of EVE players?
The prices are merely going back to normal without the bots making minerals artificially low in cost/value. Things aren't getting more expensive so much as they are getting less cheap.
PVPers will just have to un-adapt to things being aburdly cheap. And perhaps partake in more profitable ventures. |
Large Collidable Object
morons.
1253
|
Posted - 2012.04.11 23:26:00 -
[15] - Quote
Most pvp in eve is useless and only serves e-peen enlargement purposes.
Pvp should serve the purpose of making profit in the long run - not some "i run incursions to take a stupidly expensive ship out to lowswec in my pvp alt that I call my main because it has more kills"
CCP needs to provide lucrative incentives to fight over rather than endless isk faucets for weekend warriors.
You know... morons. |
Kietay Ayari
Caldari State
327
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 02:30:00 -
[16] - Quote
You shouldnt make money doing PvP. There should just be other more fun ways to make money, which there are already. It is super easy to get monies in EVE. Why do you need a higher income in highsec anyways? More money to get better ships to make more money to get better ships to make more money to get better ships to make more mon-what the o_O
Ferox #1 |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 02:45:00 -
[17] - Quote
Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it.
I'd like to see a statistical break down of sec where hulks are lost to test your ...idea. I wonder if more hulks are lost in null sec or high sec.
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Darth Tickles
Dark Sun Consortium
204
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 02:54:00 -
[18] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:I'd like to see a statistical break down of sec where hulks are lost to test your ...idea. I wonder if more hulks are lost in null sec or high sec.
Yes, because that would be proof of...
Hisec forum warriors getting bitchslapped is the best part of these changes. I'm sick from overindulging in sweet, sweet spaceships schadenfreude. GD is a smorgasbord of coddled, entitled whining. Sooooo sweet.
|
RAP ACTION HERO
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 03:21:00 -
[19] - Quote
This nerf ain't nothing compared to the truesec-anomaly nerf. |
Kengutsi Akira
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
391
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 03:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
DonHel wrote:no, we will just fly cheaper ships
eeeeew must buy ships nao
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1109909#post1109909
My stance on WiS
(updated) |
Serene Repose
Perkone
Caldari State
566
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 05:02:00 -
[21] - Quote
Oh...so trade isn't a form of PvP after all? C'mon. I thought you LIKED PvP!
Smokestack lightnin' shinin' just like gold |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
462
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 05:41:00 -
[22] - Quote
Vince Snetterton wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:We throw away 100s of battleships at a time without blinking. Everyone has deadspace-fit faction battleships for ratting. There are 800 titans in the game. There are entire fleets of hundreds of T3s Eve was spiraling towards mudflation, and CCP actually had the balls and foresight to step up and stop it before it ruined the game.
This wasn't some random decision to make the game worse; it was a deliberate and considered decision to make the game better. When you say "we", you mean the null sec alliances, yes? I don't see empire battles using fleets of T3's. And guess what, null sec income is barely getting touched by the econ nerf. They lose 10% bounties across the board, but gain hugely on minerals. High sec gets hammered, except for the increased value of low end minerals. As someone already said, don't worry, null sec will be just fine. The rich null sec alliances just became more entrenched as NO ONE will be able to amass enough wealth to take them on.
No, everybody. Especially empire wardeccers fly T3s and faction battleships, with HG Slaves. Wormhole fleets have consisted of T3s for a long time, and they, like pirate faction ships, are an everyday sight in low sec too.
One day you will understand that areas with different security status are nothing more than that- they just mark the borders of various levels of CONCORD presence. Most people travel freely in the universe. You should try it, too.
And well spoken, sir Tickles. |
Joran Dravius
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 05:46:00 -
[23] - Quote
Barbara Nichole wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. I'd like to see a statistical break down of sec where hulks are lost to test your ...idea. I wonder if more hulks are lost in null sec or high sec.
I have no doubt high sec would have more hulk kills at the moment, because there's not much of a point for them to be in null in the first place. |
Katrina Oniseki
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
432
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 06:34:00 -
[24] - Quote
Maybe if people stopped ganking miners all the time, mineral prices might start stabilizing. |
Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
72
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 06:42:00 -
[25] - Quote
Be better at PvP, then ship losses won't be an issue |
Pillowtalk
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
139
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 09:47:00 -
[26] - Quote
Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it.
Higher risk of null sec. Lol funniest thing I've heard all week. |
Falin Whalen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
194
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 15:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
Pillowtalk wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. Higher risk of null sec. Lol funniest thing I've heard all week. Well if you think Nullsec is so safe, why don't you join a nullsec alliance and come reap the rewards of nullsec then. I find it funny that the people who complain about nullsec being so safe, wouldn't set foot in nullsec because it is so dangerous.
You've got to remember that these are just simple miners. These are people of the land. The common clay of New Eden. You know... morons. |
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 15:53:00 -
[28] - Quote
Pillowtalk wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. Higher risk of null sec. Lol funniest thing I've heard all week.
The only real risk in null-sec is traveling between there and hi-sec. Once you are there, you're home free. If anything the risk you endure while in your null-sec system is significantly less than you endure in hi-sec. |
Zyress
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
52
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 15:54:00 -
[29] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Pillowtalk wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. Higher risk of null sec. Lol funniest thing I've heard all week. Well if you think Nullsec is so safe, why don't you join a nullsec alliance and come reap the rewards of nullsec then. I find it funny that the people who complain about nullsec being so safe, wouldn't set foot in nullsec because it is so dangerous.
Been there, entirely too limited and boring. |
Darth Gustav
Sons Of 0din
Fatal Ascension
323
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 15:56:00 -
[30] - Quote
Zyress wrote:Pillowtalk wrote:Darth Tickles wrote:You mean there will actually be more REWARD for the relative higher RISK of nullsec over hisec?
Oh no.
wolololololol
Also an intended change. Deal wiz it. Higher risk of null sec. Lol funniest thing I've heard all week. The only real risk in null-sec is traveling between there and hi-sec. Once you are there, you're home free. If anything the risk you endure while in your null-sec system is significantly less than you endure in hi-sec.
Thanks to our dependence on other players for intel etc.
Without that structure, null-sec becomes very dangerous again.
Who do high-sec filth depend on? Oh right, they depend on rules lawyers and CCP's willingness to listen to them.
What was your point again?
He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller.
-Darth Gustav's Axiom |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |