These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: War, Modules & Super Friends

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Crellion
Nano Rhinos
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#361 - 2012-05-18 09:23:51 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Dun Bar wrote:
Just found out Crimewatch 2.0 will not be coming with inferno. So even with new war mechanics, we still have to put up with neutal rr.. is ccp going to do anything to fix that
with inferno. Or is war still going to be one sided?


Here's how to eliminate neutral RR's effects now: Stop fighting on Station. If you're away from a station, you can tackle and kill the neutral RR.

It's pretty well documented that the people who whine about neutral logistics being unbeatable are people who have no capacity to counter logistics of any kind anyway and are looking for an excuse for why they lost a fight. "they had neutral logistics, that's why we lost" as if it would somehow magically have been different if the logistics pilots were in corp.

They are the same people who whine about station games and then try and station camp their war targets or have their fleet sit on the undock of their home station waiting for war targets to come and engage them.


Are you not forgetting the ability to know in advance how much potential (at least) RR the enemy has on the field?

Is knowing enemy will have X amount of pilots in system allready (and perhaps with scouts more than a few jumps away) not better than not knowing how many pilots the enemy fleet actually has?

A quick search on the boards will show you I have not been on any high sec wars of note in the last few years so pls accept this as "objective" third party criticism.

Tbh I think additional rr participants is at least equally powerful as additional dps participants and therefore am of a view that CCP should treat this sort of intervention in wars of others same as if the neutrals directly applied dps to the enemy... that would certainly promote more fighting imo.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#362 - 2012-05-18 11:51:03 UTC
Crellion wrote:
[quote=Vimsy Vortis]

Are you not forgetting the ability to know in advance how much potential (at least) RR the enemy has on the field?

Is knowing enemy will have X amount of pilots in system allready (and perhaps with scouts more than a few jumps away) not better than not knowing how many pilots the enemy fleet actually has?

A quick search on the boards will show you I have not been on any high sec wars of note in the last few years so pls accept this as "objective" third party criticism.

Tbh I think additional rr participants is at least equally powerful as additional dps participants and therefore am of a view that CCP should treat this sort of intervention in wars of others same as if the neutrals directly applied dps to the enemy... that would certainly promote more fighting imo.


Not forgetting it. But how is neutral RR different in that respect from:
Login Traps
Keeping the Fleet Docked until the battle
Keeping the Logi on the other side of a gate
(Out of HS, Titan Bridges and Hotdrops)
Etc.

Nobody gets to know what the enemy has in store for you or what they can bring out of the reserves if they need it. Neut RR is HS's version of it, and just like most things in HS, it's easier. (ProTip: Use Spies or just jot down Neut RR names as you see them)

More than that, both sides can use neutral RR, so everyone's equally blind.

A quick search of the forums will reveal exactly nothing, since there aren't any HS wars of note, and I just assume that everyone who invites a background check to show that their blurf smells good is an alt.

So you want to go back to people getting Concorded for Repping? Cool. That'll go over real well with the people complaining about neut RR. Neutral RR already gets the 15min's of WT fame when they Rep. Just don't fight on stations and Neutral RR aren't a problem.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Dizeezer Velar
League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees
#363 - 2012-05-18 17:38:11 UTC
The war dec changes suck. I thought that CCP was supposed to be listening to the player base, and not making ******** changes such as these. Fail.
Montevius Williams
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#364 - 2012-05-18 17:43:04 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
2nd =D

This update is awesome! Lot of good stuff!!!

Cost of war: The new war dec. mechanism don't make things that expensive, it is a fair price ( at last if you are planing to attack an alliance the same size as yours, so you only bite what you can chew)... although the real price of the war, and I mean ship prices could be lowered (but this will only happen on the next industrial patch after inferno)... And using the "count only active players" on the corp sounds good, also it would be good to pick only the players that logged in the last 30 days, it would fix the fake acc issue...

And about the modules:

Armor Adaptive Hardener I: Nice concept!!!

Extrinsic Damage Amplifier I & II: This doesn't sounds good, as a drone boat user, most of the drone boats use low slots as tank, ( except for the rattlesnake that will be overpower with lots of tank, torpedo dps and drones dps) so the gallente ships will not be that good again.... my sugestion was to make this a Hi-Slot module (since this is a drone augmentation module, not a ship dps module), so most of drone boats could really use it, removing the guns and replacing with it...

Small/Medium/Large/X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster I: Nice concept!

MagSheath Target Breaker I: Industrials will love this!

Small/Medium/Large Overclocking Processor Unit I & II: Awesome!!!

Light & Medium Web Drones: Long time needed!

Capacitor Battery edits: Sweet!! =D

About the seeding: All tech 1 should have a BPO ( It is not good to have more exceptions in the game), if you are not seeding them, make the BPC drop Meta 1-4 or faction drop...

Good job TEAM SUPER FRIENDS!!!


+1 on the Drone mod. Making it a low slot is just a Gallente nerf to an already nerfed line of ships. WTF CCP.

"The American Government indoctrination system known as public education has been relentlessly churning out socialists for over 20 years". - TravisWB
LeftNut Alpha
Corporation Corp Inc.
#365 - 2012-05-18 18:25:46 UTC
Tippia wrote:
I still maintain that the “pay for number of targets” logic is wrong-headed — no matter the base cost and any diminishing returns, it only ever means that small targets will be picked on and that dec-shielding will become the standard.

Make it a relative measure: you pay for number imbalance.

abs( ln( attacker size / target size ) / ln( size multiplier ) ) × imbalance cost + base cost.

In other words, for every [size multiplier] times larger or smaller the target is than the attacker, the cost increases by a factor of [imbalance cost], with a minimum price tag of [base cost]. This gives you a lot of variables to play with: how cheap will any war be (base cost)? How much do I have to pay to bully a small guy or annoy a large guy at the Jita undock (imbalance cost)? And, most interestingly, what actually counts as having an “unfair numerical advantage” (size multiplier)?

E.g.
A size multiplier of 1.5, imbalance cost of 50M and base cost of 5M — for every 50% increase in the size difference between target and aggressor, the war becomes 50M ISK more expensive with a minimum cost of 5M for perfectly equal sizes.

· A 10-man corp attacking a 1-man corp (or vice versa): 289M ISK.
· A 10-man corp attacking a 20-man corp (or vice versa): 90M ISK.
· A 3,500-man corp attacking a 5,000-man corp: 49M ISK.
· A 5-man corp attacking a 5,000-man corp: 857M ISK.


This^^^ +1000. I would even like to see a larger multiplier so that big imbalances (1-50 corp size versus 1000+) get wardec costs into the billions. This will make dec shields more difficult, keep nuisance wardecs down, and keep the fights between corps of relatively equal size. As a suggestion , corp sizes within 0.5 to 2.0 times the size of your corp would have no multiplier. As the other corp size goes below half or above twice your size the costs go up exponentially. A 1000 member alliance/corp could war dec a corp/alliance in the 500-2000 member size at a cost of 50M ISK but a one man alt corp attempting a dec shield would pay 1B+ to dec a 1000 member corp. Play with the numbers to suit your needs but I think the general concept is sound.
Jerika Bodet
Kingdom of Glory
#366 - 2012-05-18 23:09:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerika Bodet
cBOLTSON wrote:
Also the sparseness of CCP response in this thread is rather telling.


This is nothing new... SoniClover did this for Weeks after the War Mechanics Blog posted from Fanfest.

Other than Cameos of "We're looking into it, or We're working on it." didn't say anything of value. I.E. He was blatantly Ignoring everyone, pushing forward with their own peverse perspective on how the new system should be done, without a real clue. That or he doesn't know how to really read and take in the vast amounts of proper suggestions given there or here.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#367 - 2012-05-18 23:29:47 UTC
Jerika Bodet wrote:
cBOLTSON wrote:
Also the sparseness of CCP response in this thread is rather telling.


This is nothing new... SoniClover did this for Weeks after the War Mechanics Blog posted from Fanfest.

Other than Cameos of "We're looking into it, or We're working on it." didn't say anything of value. I.E. He was blatantly Ignoring everyone, pushing forward with their own peverse perspective on how the new system should be done, without a real clue. That or he doesn't know how to really read and take in the vast amounts of proper suggestions given there or here.

This is even more apparent with the newly announced ally system that is clearly unfinished, full of holes and inconsistent with the "you have to pay for targets" concept that has been expressed by CCP in this thread.
Zhao Wuhan
Liquicity Industrys
#368 - 2012-05-19 02:40:58 UTC
Q for CCP: Since the War Declares are going to be increased... what about the corporations who join the Navy Fleet for Caldari, Amarr, etc.. Should the price be increased for those corporations as well since in the Navy they are part of that faction which is also alliance based.
Dread Nanana
Doomheim
#369 - 2012-05-19 07:10:38 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Dread Nanana wrote:

2. Remove standing from local (as per Captain Thunk's posts few days/weeks ago)


Do you understand why standings were added to local?

Because players were already distributing custom "packs" of pilot's avatar pictures, done up with manual standings markers on them and installing them into their cache folders. Needless to say, this gave an unfair advantage to those who were willing to do this and risk CCP's wrath.

So, no, standings are not likely to be removed from local. Not unless CCP majorly changes how pilot portraits are stored in the client or doesn't rely on caching the pilot images. (Which would cause them to be downloaded from the server again for every new play session.)


If that was the reason, then maybe I should delete EVE Ugh

Picture => hash => compare hash is correct with server API
hash (ie. picture) missing or fail match? => reload image.

Since there is less than 1m characters in EVE, you can do this very, very quickly using almost no bandwidth. Like 1000 portraits check would be 24kB of data. CCP already uses a CDN for delivery of portraits which in comparison is very inefficient for portraits in local.
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#370 - 2012-05-19 17:07:00 UTC
Zhao Wuhan wrote:
Q for CCP: Since the War Declares are going to be increased... what about the corporations who join the Navy Fleet for Caldari, Amarr, etc.. Should the price be increased for those corporations as well since in the Navy they are part of that faction which is also alliance based.


We're not adjusting that in any way at this time.
Jalmari Huitsikko
Avanto
Hole Control
#371 - 2012-05-20 09:54:54 UTC
Drones already do unproportionally high damage, why do you add a new module to make them even more overpowered and broken poopoo? Fix drones and their general use first then after that's done add damage mods. I cannot describe well enough how bad idea it is to add a damage mod for drones within current game mechanics.

Micro jumpdrive, ok nice idea. HOWEVER. We already have too much safely jump here and there. Gee - combine that with covert ops cloaking. First fix jumping between systems so you have REASONABLE chances to catch a target and engage without being instapopped by deathstar pos or something. Getting to kill an alt character with cynokestrel is hardly a reward. While I am at it how about just get rid of your money making alt accounts to just create cynos. Please stop ripping off my money just so I can make a cyno.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#372 - 2012-05-20 20:42:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Drones already do unproportionally high damage


Really?
A Dominix using 5 "Berserk II" at all skills LVL5 does 386 DPS with drones...
A Machariel with "800mm repeting atiliary II x7" 4 gyrostabilizers II using "Hail L" does 1178 DPS + Drones...

So Drones damage is not that hi, expecially for drone boats, you dont know what you are talking about, actualy drones sux as main damage output......


And I still think that this Drone Damage module should be HI-SLOT for drone boats.....

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#373 - 2012-05-20 23:02:27 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Drones already do unproportionally high damage


Really?
A Dominix using 5 "Berserk II" at all skills LVL5 does 386 DPS with drones...
A Machariel with "800mm repeting atiliary II x7" 4 gyrostabilizers II using "Hail L" does 1178 DPS + Drones...

So Drones damage is not that hi, expecially for drone boats, you dont know what you are talking about, actualy drones sux as main damage output......


And I still think that this Drone Damage module should be HI-SLOT for drone boats.....


Domi's also use Turrets. In fact, for Hisec structure bashing, the Domi is King, giving you 920 DPS completely AFK for 120m, mostly insured.

For normal PvP, the Domi does fine with blasters or Neuts, with the drones letting it pose a significant threat to small ships (not something most battleships can do).


[Dominix, Afk Structure Deeps]

Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L
Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L
Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L
Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L
Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L
Mega Modulated Energy Beam I, Multifrequency L

Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II

Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II
Reactor Control Unit II
Reactor Control Unit II
Reactor Control Unit II
Reactor Control Unit II

Large Sentry Damage Augmentor I
Large Sentry Damage Augmentor I
[Empty Rig slot]


Garde II x5

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#374 - 2012-05-21 01:53:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
RubyPorto wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Drones already do unproportionally high damage


Really?
A Dominix using 5 "Berserk II" at all skills LVL5 does 386 DPS with drones...
A Machariel with "800mm repeting atiliary II x7" 4 gyrostabilizers II using "Hail L" does 1178 DPS + Drones...

So Drones damage is not that hi, expecially for drone boats, you dont know what you are talking about, actualy drones sux as main damage output......


And I still think that this Drone Damage module should be HI-SLOT for drone boats.....


Domi's also use Turrets. In fact, for Hisec structure bashing, the Domi is King, giving you 920 DPS completely AFK for 120m, mostly insured.

For normal PvP, the Domi does fine with blasters or Neuts, with the drones letting it pose a significant threat to small ships (not something most battleships can do).



920 is still less then the 1300 that a machariel can reach ( also using drones) and having some tank MWD and stuff...
Drones doesn't do that much damage, you cant say that it is unproportionaly Hi and you can't say that Dominix does toons of DPS on PVP, in fact, it does an almost moderate damage if all your skills are optimized......

Domi is one of my favorite ships, but having this Drone module for low slot will not help it at all....
One Bash Apocalipse will do more DPS then a domi with it... just wait inferno and see... Apoc will take it place on Hi-Sec bashing......
Also, most galente drone boats will not use this module... This shoud have been a hi-slot module for drone boats not a way to make gallente even more uselles...

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#375 - 2012-05-21 04:10:29 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Drones already do unproportionally high damage


Really?
A Dominix using 5 "Berserk II" at all skills LVL5 does 386 DPS with drones...
A Machariel with "800mm repeting atiliary II x7" 4 gyrostabilizers II using "Hail L" does 1178 DPS + Drones...

So Drones damage is not that hi, expecially for drone boats, you dont know what you are talking about, actualy drones sux as main damage output......


And I still think that this Drone Damage module should be HI-SLOT for drone boats.....


Domi's also use Turrets. In fact, for Hisec structure bashing, the Domi is King, giving you 920 DPS completely AFK for 120m, mostly insured.

For normal PvP, the Domi does fine with blasters or Neuts, with the drones letting it pose a significant threat to small ships (not something most battleships can do).



920 is still less then the 1300 that a machariel can reach ( also using drones) and having some tank MWD and stuff...
Drones doesn't do that much damage, you cant say that it is unproportionaly Hi and you can't say that Dominix does toons of DPS on PVP, in fact, it does an almost moderate damage if all your skills are optimized......

Domi is one of my favorite ships, but having this Drone module for low slot will not help it at all....
One Bash Apocalipse will do more DPS then a domi with it... just wait inferno and see... Apoc will take it place on Hi-Sec bashing......
Also, most galente drone boats will not use this module... This shoud have been a hi-slot module for drone boats not a way to make gallente even more uselles...


Bash Tach (better damage than Megas) Apoc (set for AFK work, so Meta Guns, T2 Else) does 773 DPS (aka 180 DPS less than the Domi) with 3x Gardes and costs 190m (aka 70m more than the Domi). Good try though.

920 is what it reaches with T1 Pulse Lasers. With a Domi tricked out the way you trick out a Mach to get 1300 DPS, you get right around 1200 DPS for a non-Pirate BS.

Pirate Faction ships are supposed to be better than T1. The comparable Gall boat for a Mach would be the Vindi which gets LOLer Deeps.

Anyway, if the Drone mod were a high, it would be useless to everyone. As it is, it might be useful to Neut Domis in PvP, but it'll mostly be useful to PvE ships. Drones aren't usually what you use for DPS in PvP cause they asplode a lot.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon
AntichX
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#376 - 2012-05-21 14:33:03 UTC  |  Edited by: AntichX
I understand why a corp/alli with many members has to pay a lot of gold to war one with a low number, what i don´t understand is why a small corp/alli has to pay even more to war a big one. For a corp with 1k members 200mil / week means 0.2 mil/ member. Is a lot but can be easy farmed. For a corp with 10 members to pay 300mil to war one with 1k members is just insane. Is a price 150 times bigger. And we have to assume for a big corp is easier to make isk then for a small one.
That is why i would see as a better option setting up a price /member of the declaring corp and using a formula to adjust from there to encourage 1. fights between similar size corp 2. corp/alli not to war entire eve but the ones that they actually have some quarrel 3. big corp/alli not to be immune to walking on the corpses of the small ones just because those would have to pay a fortune to war them.

Quote:
Armor Adaptive Hardener I - Low slot. Armor Hardener that adjusts its resistance based on the damage received

How exactly will this work. If let´s say the module has 40%(arbitrary value) resists. I will get 40% kinetic res if i am hit with kinetic only? If i am hit with hybrids it will give 20% kinetic and 20% thermic? 40% to both kinetic and thermic? Or it will adapt to the amount of kinetic and therm dmg i am taking? (25% kin 15% therm or so). Also, will it anticipate dmg (adapt before or after taking the initial dmg?).

Quote:
Extrinsic Damage Amplifier I & II - Low slot. A damage amplifier module for drones

As most drone ships being armor tanked it will be a big issue with fitting this. Probably will make rattlesnake a little better(not that it really needed it). Guess with the adaptive hardener gallente will be able to change some of their tank to 1-2 of this and improuve their dps. Seen some people thinking about if they weren´t better as a high slot module. Would surely make more sence in terms of what it does however it wouldn´t change much. To be able to use them you would have had to drop some turrets/nos. The only way this would have made drone ships more powerful would have been mid slot. Still would like to know what "drones" on module description means. combat, sentry, fighters, fighter-bombers or just some of them.

Quote:
MagSheath Target Breaker I - Mid slot. A module that has a chance of breaking the lock of ships targeting you, the chance increases the more ships target you at one time. Also breaks your locks. Reduces scan resolution significantly as a downside
I guess that breakes targets on friendly logistics. And if so, that will boost a little the local repairs(even if buffers will still be better for fleet fights), change very little for shield remote reps(logi will just have to retarget and so will most of the enemy) but will be a major blow for armor remote reps which give the boost at the end of the circle(that will never happen cause of the target removal). Also, i don´t see(yes my vision is limited :P) many uses for this module. Logistics won´t be able to save themselves cause nobody needs 20 sec targeting logi, valuable assets like bhals are hit anyway by NOS/Neut nerfs so they might not be primary any more cause they will do more harm then good to whom will have to hold their cap. Also you might say you can use it to escape but it won´t save you from warp bubbles. And i am quite sure is easy to break a fleet in 2 groups that target main target at 10 sec intervals so you will be able to break only 50% of the locks while gimping yourself to oblivion.
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#377 - 2012-05-21 16:16:33 UTC  |  Edited by: D'Kelle
Regarding the seeding of the New Module Bpc's nice to find Worm Holes miss out all together, again!
A random drifting space wreck could have been deployed to at least give us a small chance of encountering these even seeding of the lowest run Bpc,s would have been a pleasant change to encounter, and could have been pulled into the gravity well of a Sig even one a month would have been SOMETHING! You seem to miss us out every time.

And don't say we have special benefits, each type of space has its own benefits and drawbacks so why do Empire and low-null sec get these and not Wspace?
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#378 - 2012-05-21 17:52:29 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Jalmari Huitsikko wrote:
Drones already do unproportionally high damage


Really?
A Dominix using 5 "Berserk II" at all skills LVL5 does 386 DPS with drones...
A Machariel with "800mm repeting atiliary II x7" 4 gyrostabilizers II using "Hail L" does 1178 DPS + Drones...

So Drones damage is not that hi, expecially for drone boats, you dont know what you are talking about, actualy drones sux as main damage output......


And I still think that this Drone Damage module should be HI-SLOT for drone boats.....


Domi's also use Turrets. In fact, for Hisec structure bashing, the Domi is King, giving you 920 DPS completely AFK for 120m, mostly insured.

For normal PvP, the Domi does fine with blasters or Neuts, with the drones letting it pose a significant threat to small ships (not something most battleships can do).



920 is still less then the 1300 that a machariel can reach ( also using drones) and having some tank MWD and stuff...
Drones doesn't do that much damage, you cant say that it is unproportionaly Hi and you can't say that Dominix does toons of DPS on PVP, in fact, it does an almost moderate damage if all your skills are optimized......

Domi is one of my favorite ships, but having this Drone module for low slot will not help it at all....
One Bash Apocalipse will do more DPS then a domi with it... just wait inferno and see... Apoc will take it place on Hi-Sec bashing......
Also, most galente drone boats will not use this module... This shoud have been a hi-slot module for drone boats not a way to make gallente even more uselles...


Personally I feel CCP privately messed up with the design config for armor tanking on Gallente ships and either cant figure out how to fix it, or do not have to will to sort it out correctly, so they either ignore the problem or throw another sticky plaster at it :(
D'Kelle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#379 - 2012-05-21 18:00:47 UTC
Crellion wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
RubyPorto wrote:
Dun Bar wrote:
Just found out Crimewatch 2.0 will not be coming with inferno. So even with new war mechanics, we still have to put up with neutal rr.. is ccp going to do anything to fix that
with inferno. Or is war still going to be one sided?


Here's how to eliminate neutral RR's effects now: Stop fighting on Station. If you're away from a station, you can tackle and kill the neutral RR.

It's pretty well documented that the people who whine about neutral logistics being unbeatable are people who have no capacity to counter logistics of any kind anyway and are looking for an excuse for why they lost a fight. "they had neutral logistics, that's why we lost" as if it would somehow magically have been different if the logistics pilots were in corp.

They are the same people who whine about station games and then try and station camp their war targets or have their fleet sit on the undock of their home station waiting for war targets to come and engage them.


Are you not forgetting the ability to know in advance how much potential (at least) RR the enemy has on the field?

Is knowing enemy will have X amount of pilots in system allready (and perhaps with scouts more than a few jumps away) not better than not knowing how many pilots the enemy fleet actually has?

A quick search on the boards will show you I have not been on any high sec wars of note in the last few years so pls accept this as "objective" third party criticism.

Tbh I think additional rr participants is at least equally powerful as additional dps participants and therefore am of a view that CCP should treat this sort of intervention in wars of others same as if the neutrals directly applied dps to the enemy... that would certainly promote more fighting imo.


Are you totally dumb, or just naturally daft? If your enemy can use the tactic then why don’t you wise up and use it as well it is not as if your opponent(s) are the only ones who can use neutral RR, they do not have a monopoly on the concept, for goodness sake stop whining open your eyes and mind a little, yes, I know it hurts, but at least try!
Brunaburh
Ever Vigilant Fountain Defenders
#380 - 2012-05-21 18:31:16 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
Brunaburh wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
Quote:
Also, as the thinking is to start to add modules on a regular basis, so we're looking into ways of how we can fight the potential issues associated with it, such as bloating the market too much and introducing power creep. Seeding through loot drops gives us better control over where and when and how much to seed, which is an important feature for us to have for the future.

what happened to the mantra of a player-run economy?

How is a loot drop that requires a player to run a site and acquire the BPC less of a "player run economy" than an NPC seeded BPO?

in one case the players decide supply (based on an economic rationale), in the other case CCP do.

Um, excuse me?

NPC BPOs are unlimited in supply. There is no "deciding" if it's available. Random exploration-dropped BPC volume is wholly determined by player activity. You want it? Go find it, or pay for the BPC someone else found.