These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

[Issue] Technetium
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hemmo Paskiainen
#1 - 2012-05-25 17:03:40 UTC
I still amazed that technetium currenty is how it is. As my understanding the buff to tech was created to be a solution to the disprosium and promethium bottlenecks. Since this chance the technetium has proven to be a bigger bottleneck than those 2. In matter of fact, this was known and well spoken on feedback sections on this forum. This gave me a few questions and i was wondering if people knew answers on these;

why has there been choosen for technetium, a rarity 32 moon
why has there been choosen for a moon type thats the most clustered moon ingame
why are all other more rarity moons (r64), so useless; iow disbalanced as in material usage in t2 comps
why is this disbalance ongoing for the time it has being going on
why is the income stream gained by some alliances from this condoned by ccp
is there a limit on how much isk an entity can gain for doing nothing exept fueling a pos once a month and hauling goo to empire
would it be possible that hoarding that much is over a long period of time, create a unfair armsrace vs other entities
wouldnt it be time bat this type of income to eveheaven and invent a more active way for enities to gain income, like taxes
as these queztion affects 0.0 politics alot and is a ongoing issue from a gigantic daily player base, isnt it a good idea to review the decion making process of the tech change and investigate this matter
as some wiseguy said; if its too good to be true it probaly is, is it?
as concerning player im shocked about the entire issue, modeling, implementing and handling. i would like to encourage CSM members to take over this serious issue that might br endangering the continuation of eve gameplay on longterm


/Hemmo

If relativity equals time plus momentum, what equals relativity, if the momentum is minus to the time?
TheBreadMuncher
Protus Correction Facility Inc.
#2 - 2012-05-25 17:08:34 UTC  |  Edited by: TheBreadMuncher
Because HTFU

To clarify:
It's because, while supercaps are the endgame for individual pilots, tech moons are the endgame for alliances. They're supposed to be goals for alliances to have, but now alliances are too entrenched to unshift.

"We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming.
Implying Implications
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2012-05-25 17:13:57 UTC
shut up

hello
Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#4 - 2012-05-25 17:28:34 UTC
So your alliance has tried and failed repeatedly over the past month or so to take tech, so now you've decided 'If you can't beat em, whine at CCP'.
Ahh the -A- we all know and love.
Tinnin Sylph
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-05-25 17:30:39 UTC
We won EVE. It's ok to be mad about it.

Heh.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2012-05-25 17:33:07 UTC
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:
I still amazed that technetium currenty is how it is. As my understanding the buff to tech was created to be a solution to the disprosium and promethium bottlenecks. Since this chance the technetium has proven to be a bigger bottleneck than those 2. In matter of fact, this was known and well spoken on feedback sections on this forum. This gave me a few questions and i was wondering if people knew answers on these;

why has there been choosen for technetium, a rarity 32 moon
why has there been choosen for a moon type thats the most clustered moon ingame
why are all other more rarity moons (r64), so useless; iow disbalanced as in material usage in t2 comps
why is this disbalance ongoing for the time it has being going on
why is the income stream gained by some alliances from this condoned by ccp
is there a limit on how much isk an entity can gain for doing nothing exept fueling a pos once a month and hauling goo to empire
would it be possible that hoarding that much is over a long period of time, create a unfair armsrace vs other entities
wouldnt it be time bat this type of income to eveheaven and invent a more active way for enities to gain income, like taxes
as these queztion affects 0.0 politics alot and is a ongoing issue from a gigantic daily player base, isnt it a good idea to review the decion making process of the tech change and investigate this matter
as some wiseguy said; if its too good to be true it probaly is, is it?
as concerning player im shocked about the entire issue, modeling, implementing and handling. i would like to encourage CSM members to take over this serious issue that might br endangering the continuation of eve gameplay on longterm


/Hemmo



For those of you having trouble reading this I'll summarize.


For nearly a month solid now AAA has been attacking Pandemic Legion tech moons, but diplomacy, tact, and strategy have beaten them into the ground.

Their recourse is now to cry on EVE forums instead of their own internal forums over the way Herc handled the diplomatic situation when he entered the theater, and the way hes tried to hamfist his way through it with threats of violence to the other moon holders in the area.

If AAA wanted tech moons, they could have had them easily, but by threatening violence against the other tech holders should they get involved, Herc basically slit his own wrists, because of course they all got involved.


Now, this long month later, AAA starts to get mad and of course if you can't beat something in AAA your next obvious step is to cry for it to be nerfed.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2012-05-25 17:33:14 UTC
Implying Implications wrote:
shut up

"Little ginger moron" ~David Hasselhoff 

Want to see what Surf is training or how little isk Surf has?  http://eveboard.com/pilot/Surfin%27s_PlunderBunny
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#8 - 2012-05-25 17:33:23 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
So your alliance has tried and failed repeatedly over the past month or so to take tech, so now you've decided 'If you can't beat em, whine at CCP'.
Ahh the -A- we all know and love.


Kind of like how you couldn't out blob Raiden Titan fleets so you sucked some ccpdick and had them nerf your enemy?

When in Rome?
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2012-05-25 17:34:22 UTC
if you want to make a point then do so.

don't make me read through a wall of dreadfully written rhetoric questions.

.
Pisov viet
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-05-25 17:35:45 UTC
Quote:
As my understanding the buff to tech was created to be a solution to the disprosium and promethium bottlenecks. Since this chance the technetium has proven to be a bigger bottleneck than those 2.

Your head is deep into your ass if you think the tech bottleneck is anywhere close to the situation before that.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#11 - 2012-05-25 17:37:11 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
So your alliance has tried and failed repeatedly over the past month or so to take tech, so now you've decided 'If you can't beat em, whine at CCP'.
Ahh the -A- we all know and love.

Tinnin Sylph wrote:
We won EVE. It's ok to be mad about it.

So smug.

Thanks for the whines, please come again.

10/10 would :smug: again.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#12 - 2012-05-25 17:37:33 UTC
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:
why is the income stream gained by some alliances from this condoned by ccp


Because you need to fight to get them, they've never been given to someone and you perfectly know it.

The good stuff is that you can go there and fight to get them. It's only up to you to do something about instead of moaning.

brb
DurrHurrDurr
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#13 - 2012-05-25 17:39:21 UTC
Take a look at the distribution of R64s in regions like Delve/ Querious and some areas of the drone regions. Before the last moon rebalance R64s (excluding Thulium) were the king moneymakers and Delve had more of them than anywhere else by a pretty gross margin.

Lack of balance drives conflict. It sparked great wars over Delve, the DRF northern push, the anti-coalition coalition pushes and the general firestorm that has been Tenal/Tribute/Vale of the Silent/Geminate.

Alliances that want to be rich will move and invade to get rich. Just because -A- isn't as rich as it used to be because of the rebalance has little to do with imbalance (especially considering the previous prices of R64s and the strength of Delve/Querious in that regard) and more to do with the fact that they have spent years in the same handful of regions without shifting their moneymaking schemes. All they've been are the holders of Catch and the presiding landlord of renter slums.

Technetium is not ruining other alliances' income; the other alliances' inability to take technetium (even in neutral areas such as Aridia, Syndicate, Outer Ring, Venal, etc) is what's ruining their income. Rooks and Kings has owned much of the NPC null/lowsec technetium until recently, there's no reason -A- shouldn't be able to wrestle some of it away other than their own shortcomings.
SetrakDark
Doomheim
#14 - 2012-05-25 17:39:32 UTC
technetium is not "working as intended" and never has been

ccp tried to fix the previous bottleneck, but made a worse mess

that is also the reason a fix to tech is taking so long because they don't want to mess it up again

there should be high value moons that top alliances are prepared to tear each others guts out to own, but they should be part of a balanced and intentional system of sliding value, starting from R64s and on down

i hope that clears the current tech issue up for everyone on the GD subforum again...for like the 50th time...
Indeterminacy
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#15 - 2012-05-25 17:44:12 UTC
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:
I still amazed that technetium currenty is how it is. As my understanding the buff to tech was created to be a solution to the disprosium and promethium bottlenecks. Since this chance the technetium has proven to be a bigger bottleneck than those 2. In matter of fact, this was known and well spoken on feedback sections on this forum. This gave me a few questions and i was wondering if people knew answers on these;

why has there been choosen for technetium, a rarity 32 moon
why has there been choosen for a moon type thats the most clustered moon ingame
why are all other more rarity moons (r64), so useless; iow disbalanced as in material usage in t2 comps
why is this disbalance ongoing for the time it has being going on
why is the income stream gained by some alliances from this condoned by ccp
is there a limit on how much isk an entity can gain for doing nothing exept fueling a pos once a month and hauling goo to empire
would it be possible that hoarding that much is over a long period of time, create a unfair armsrace vs other entities
wouldnt it be time bat this type of income to eveheaven and invent a more active way for enities to gain income, like taxes
as these queztion affects 0.0 politics alot and is a ongoing issue from a gigantic daily player base, isnt it a good idea to review the decion making process of the tech change and investigate this matter
as some wiseguy said; if its too good to be true it probaly is, is it?
as concerning player im shocked about the entire issue, modeling, implementing and handling. i would like to encourage CSM members to take over this serious issue that might br endangering the continuation of eve gameplay on longterm


/Hemmo


This kind of trash is one reason we stayed in the -A- block for all of like 5 days. Pathetic.
Commander Spurty
#16 - 2012-05-25 17:44:18 UTC
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/region/moons

Play a game. Redistribute moons fairer. Go for it .. ouch!

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#17 - 2012-05-25 17:45:22 UTC
SetrakDark wrote:
technetium is not "working as intended" and never has been

ccp tried to fix the previous bottleneck, but made a worse mess

that is also the reason a fix to tech is taking so long because they don't want to mess it up again

there should be high value moons that top alliances are prepared to tear each others guts out to own, but they should be part of a balanced and intentional system of sliding value, starting from R64s and on down.



Its not possible to do what you're saying, there will ALWAYS be a bottleneck, always.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Zain Andreas
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2012-05-25 17:47:37 UTC
Ticket closed: WORKSFORME
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#19 - 2012-05-25 17:47:43 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
So your alliance has tried and failed repeatedly over the past month or so to take tech, so now you've decided 'If you can't beat em, whine at CCP'.
Ahh the -A- we all know and love.

.
SetrakDark
Doomheim
#20 - 2012-05-25 17:48:14 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Its not possible to do what you're saying, there will ALWAYS be a bottleneck, always.


I tend to agree with you. I think CCP have created a system that they don't have the computational ability to control. However, it seems that they think they can, and that belief is shaping their decision process to attempt yet another fix.
123Next pageLast page