These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zishy Linaris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2017-06-01 23:24:18 UTC
Ramagar wrote:
"The vast majority of nullsec miners will not be negatively impacted."

I don't know where you learned your command of the English language or truly understated the impact here.

but what you really should have stated instead of trying to sugar coat the nerf is.

"Every nullsec miner will be negatively impacted."

What poison pill are you going to try and convince us is a candy next.




i like your post. amok is recruiting
Inquisitor Lucious
Maybe it's Maybelline
#142 - 2017-06-01 23:24:28 UTC
Ramagar wrote:
"The vast majority of nullsec miners will not be negatively impacted."

I don't know where you learned your command of the English language or truly understated the impact here.

but what you really should have stated instead of trying to sugar coat the nerf is.

"Every nullsec miner will be negatively impacted."

What poison pill are you going to try and convince us is a candy next.



This is a section 4. violation right here friend.
Ktall Daganael
Imperial Guardians
Tactical Narcotics Team
#143 - 2017-06-01 23:24:32 UTC
CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.
joecuster
Anime Masters
#144 - 2017-06-01 23:24:39 UTC
ISD Max Trix wrote:
XveNos wrote:
ISD Max Trix wrote:
Post and those quoting them where removed for one or more the above reasons.


You mean "Were"?



Fixed it thanks.


ISD can you implement the vulnerability for this thread again the toxicity is too high!
Zishy Linaris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2017-06-01 23:26:05 UTC
Inquisitor Lucious wrote:
Ramagar wrote:
"The vast majority of nullsec miners will not be negatively impacted."

I don't know where you learned your command of the English language or truly understated the impact here.

but what you really should have stated instead of trying to sugar coat the nerf is.

"Every nullsec miner will be negatively impacted."

What poison pill are you going to try and convince us is a candy next.



This is a section 4. violation right here friend.


your posting is soon-to-be-recruited-by-amok level bad
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2017-06-01 23:26:20 UTC
Ktall Daganael wrote:
CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.



Except that extremely long anom respawns are just going to kill 0.0 mining entirely. You can't add another rorqual to mine an anom that isn't there.
XveNos
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#147 - 2017-06-01 23:27:59 UTC
Time to start super ratting again boys! unsub the rorqual alts.

-5 Rorqual account subs CCP. That's £49.95 a month.

CCP subs be like!
Kosmonaught
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#148 - 2017-06-01 23:28:06 UTC
joecuster wrote:
ISD Max Trix wrote:
XveNos wrote:
ISD Max Trix wrote:
Post and those quoting them where removed for one or more the above reasons.


You mean "Were"?



Fixed it thanks.


ISD can you implement the vulnerability for this thread again the toxicity is too high!


This bad post offends me.
Antal Marius
Allied Operations
Mechanicus Macabre Immortale
#149 - 2017-06-01 23:28:07 UTC
Sir Marksalot wrote:
Ktall Daganael wrote:
CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.



Except that extremely long anom respawns are just going to kill 0.0 mining entirely. You can't add another rorqual to mine an anom that isn't there.



We're just going to see large fleets of rorquals moving from system to system
Zishy Linaris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#150 - 2017-06-01 23:28:50 UTC
XveNos wrote:
Time to start super ratting again boys! unsub the rorqual alts.

-5 Rorqual account subs CCP. That's £49.95 a month.

CCP subs be like!


just 5? amateur
Kosmonaught
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#151 - 2017-06-01 23:29:04 UTC
I guess CCP doesn't like eve subscriptions....
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2017-06-01 23:29:11 UTC
XveNos wrote:
Time to start super ratting again boys! unsub the rorqual alts.

-5 Rorqual account subs CCP. That's £49.95 a month.

CCP subs be like!



Same.
Balthazarra
Guardians Incorporated
Cynosural Field Theory.
#153 - 2017-06-01 23:29:24 UTC
With Jump Fatigue being such a widely supported success

I'm really surprised that we still don't have a mining fatigue


Fozzie when can we expect this?

these delays are just not enough.

Can we get a fatigue timer for every time I end a siege or triage cycle too?

Lets make it so we have reasons to utilize the ship spinning counter.
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#154 - 2017-06-01 23:30:15 UTC
Antal Marius wrote:
Sir Marksalot wrote:
Ktall Daganael wrote:
CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.



Except that extremely long anom respawns are just going to kill 0.0 mining entirely. You can't add another rorqual to mine an anom that isn't there.



We're just going to see large fleets of rorquals moving from system to system



no you're not lol
Kosmonaught
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#155 - 2017-06-01 23:31:10 UTC
Balthazarra wrote:
With Jump Fatigue being such a widely supported success

I'm really surprised that we still don't have a mining fatigue


Fozzie when can we expect this?

these delays are just not enough.

Can we get a fatigue timer for every time I end a siege or triage cycle too?

Lets make it so we have reasons to utilize the ship spinning counter.


We should get a log on fatigue timer.
Ktall Daganael
Imperial Guardians
Tactical Narcotics Team
#156 - 2017-06-01 23:32:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Ktall Daganael
Sir Marksalot wrote:
Ktall Daganael wrote:
CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.



Except that extremely long anom respawns are just going to kill 0.0 mining entirely. You can't add another rorqual to mine an anom that isn't there.


completely right. My point was : instead of this ridiculous idea of nerfing rorq/mining again... so no anom respawn time change in my proposal
Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2017-06-01 23:33:14 UTC
At least injector and plex prices should go down now.
Big Alz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#158 - 2017-06-01 23:33:56 UTC
Cucked[
Nothing Personnel
Perkone
Caldari State
#159 - 2017-06-01 23:34:29 UTC
Just how much does this cut into the profits of people who have so many multiboxed Rorquals?
Amber Hurtini
Allied Operations
Mechanicus Macabre Immortale
#160 - 2017-06-01 23:38:22 UTC
Hello Fozzie.

I am not sure what coolaid you have been drinking but i am considering i may need to drink the other coolaid.

With the changes you are proposing are those that affect mostly the small players or mining corps that are in nullsec with only a few Rorqs and this will kill them unless they are part of some huge CCPL alliance where they are not affected by the changes.

You look to solve an issue that is not an issue where the true issue issue is with those that are multiboxing and using ISBoxer still to this date.

Imagine that these changes take place and the indy Guys demand a balance to the Ratting sites where a Sanctum is an hour and the lowest rat site is 10 minutes.

as with those changes you are proposing there is no reduction in the use of heavy water on the Rorquals. there is no buff to tank and drone bonus damage. and the T2 mining drones will eventually start out mining the Excavator drones.

I would not be surprised if there are riots and protesting in Jita, Dodixie, Amarr, and Hek.

I am willing to play as a GM and work for CCP and start randomly poking miners with the army of Rorquals and find out who is using IS boxer.
CCP get your act together and start facing the real issue you keep turning a blind eye to.