These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tech Rebuff
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tarsus Zateki
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#121 - 2012-07-27 23:15:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarsus Zateki
None ofthe Above wrote:

Thanks for making me laugh.

I really can't even begin to respond. The levels of irony and sperge are too deep to even start to get into. I guess I'll have to admit that you are your own best counterargument and simply applaud the performance.

Bravo sir.


"I don't actually have a counter-argument so here's some high sounding mumbo-jumbo to make it seem like I didn't get dunked."

Just paraphrasing your post a little. Just a little.

You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.
Werst Dendenahzees
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#122 - 2012-07-27 23:44:44 UTC
And this is the sound of being dunked so hard the backboard breaks.
None ofthe Above
#123 - 2012-07-27 23:47:45 UTC
Tarsus Zateki wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:

Thanks for making me laugh.

I really can't even begin to respond. The levels of irony and sperge are too deep to even start to get into. I guess I'll have to admit that you are your own best counterargument and simply applaud the performance.

Bravo sir.


"I don't actually have a counter-argument so here's some high sounding mumbo-jumbo to make it seem like I didn't get dunked."

Just paraphrasing your post a little. Just a little.


Just a little. :D

But fair enough.

I'll grant you this. I don't have a perfect solution to all this, it is a right fine mess CCP has gotten itself into.

You are quite right that any of these fixes will probably be ripe for exploitation by the Goon Finance team. Between the amassed wealth and their level of competence (which I have a healthy respect for) the rich will likely keep getting richer. Although changes might give other parties a chance to grab a piece of the pie, I've not deluded myself into thinking the Goons, CFC or related parties will curl up into a ball and die out of these changes.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#124 - 2012-07-28 00:03:13 UTC
To help my friend, none ofthe above, out. There is some complexity to these moons. Seems like the main stream view of moons and such that CCP sells is a bit different then how the goons see moons. CCP was hoping moons would create conflict mostly. The goons do do conflict, but they also like something else from their moons. I would say the word that fits, but its kind of taboo here in EVE to utter it.

But with this alchemy fix to moons, it satisfies what the devs kind of wanted from tech and moons, the fight and conflict, but it does seem to leave the goons without much future here or no game design for them.

The main problem with the goons though, is that I am at a lost to see how to help them out. Its kind of cool what they want, but its really hard to implement or keep it going here, not really sure what to do with it, plus I just saw it now so its a bit soon.

.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Powers Sa
#125 - 2012-07-28 00:16:07 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:


Thanks for making me laugh.

I really can't even begin to respond. The levels of irony and sperge are too deep to even start to get into. I guess I'll have to admit that you are your own best counterargument and simply applaud the performance.

Bravo sir.

I see krixtal is avoiding another ban.

Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?https://eveninggames.net/register/ref/dQddmNgyLhFBqNJk

Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.
None ofthe Above
#126 - 2012-07-28 00:23:32 UTC
rodyas wrote:
To help my friend, none ofthe above, out. There is some complexity to these moons. Seems like the main stream view of moons and such that CCP sells is a bit different then how the goons see moons. CCP was hoping moons would create conflict mostly. The goons do do conflict, but they also like something else from their moons. I would say the word that fits, but its kind of taboo here in EVE to utter it.

But with this alchemy fix to moons, it satisfies what the devs kind of wanted from tech and moons, the fight and conflict, but it does seem to leave the goons without much future here or no game design for them.

The main problem with the goons though, is that I am at a lost to see how to help them out. Its kind of cool what they want, but its really hard to implement or keep it going here, not really sure what to do with it, plus I just saw it now so its a bit soon.

.


Heh what? Are you trolling again or high?

"goons do do conflict" - poetic

"seem to leave the goons without much future here"

Goons will have to adapt, I am sure. Some changes. But they have plenty of resources and probably understand alchemy better than anyone.

You can start writing the eulogy if you like, but I doubt these changes will be the death of goondom.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#127 - 2012-07-28 00:31:43 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselSA
None ofthe Above wrote:

I was simply pointed out The Mittani himself is on record as thinking the concentration was a bad idea. But now GEWNS are here in the forums defending the status quo.

the tech nerf was 100% needed

10:1 tech alchemy, however, appears to be an overnerf that does not create new moons worth fighting over and makes tech still worth mining but not really worth fighting over

I don't even really like the method where tech is left as the bottleneck, I would prefer it be moved to an r64, but that'd be more difficult to jam into a minor patch
None ofthe Above
#128 - 2012-07-28 00:38:54 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:

I was simply pointed out The Mittani himself is on record as thinking the concentration was a bad idea. But now GEWNS are here in the forums defending the status quo.

the tech nerf was 100% needed

10:1 tech alchemy, however, appears to be an overnerf that does not create new moons worth fighting over and makes tech still worth mining but not really worth fighting over

I don't even really like the method where tech is left as the bottleneck, I would prefer it be moved to an r64, but that'd be more difficult to jam into a minor patch


10:1 alchemy does seem to be "spinning the dials and see what happens". CCP has a tendency to overdo things once the get going nerfing something.

I was hoping for something a bit more subtle with alchemy, it being the first step, and something more comprehensive and game changing down the road.

Ah well.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#129 - 2012-07-28 00:49:03 UTC  |  Edited by: rodyas
None ofthe Above wrote:
rodyas wrote:
To help my friend, none ofthe above, out. There is some complexity to these moons. Seems like the main stream view of moons and such that CCP sells is a bit different then how the goons see moons. CCP was hoping moons would create conflict mostly. The goons do do conflict, but they also like something else from their moons. I would say the word that fits, but its kind of taboo here in EVE to utter it.

But with this alchemy fix to moons, it satisfies what the devs kind of wanted from tech and moons, the fight and conflict, but it does seem to leave the goons without much future here or no game design for them.

The main problem with the goons though, is that I am at a lost to see how to help them out. Its kind of cool what they want, but its really hard to implement or keep it going here, not really sure what to do with it, plus I just saw it now so its a bit soon.

.


Heh what? Are you trolling again or high?

"goons do do conflict" - poetic

"seem to leave the goons without much future here"

Goons will have to adapt, I am sure. Some changes. But they have plenty of resources and probably understand alchemy better than anyone.

You can start writing the eulogy if you like, but I doubt these changes will be the death of goondom.


You forget, my friend, that I never troll, just look like it. Also you came from EVE or for EVE, but the goons did not come from EVE or for EVE. So doing what they want, is always hard to implement. There are ideas, then there are non-EVE ideas, and they are harder to do or implement.

I kind of see what that goon wants with the 64, but good luck with CCP. I would say the best thing to do, is talk to the other tech owners and stuff and people who want to get into tech, and wether they like the alchemy way or the 64 way. Maybe there is a bigger market for it. You guys aren't the only people who own moons, or want them. So it will be hard for CCP just go off of what you want really.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#130 - 2012-07-28 00:58:38 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
None ofthe Above wrote:

I was simply pointed out The Mittani himself is on record as thinking the concentration was a bad idea. But now GEWNS are here in the forums defending the status quo.

the tech nerf was 100% needed

10:1 tech alchemy, however, appears to be an overnerf that does not create new moons worth fighting over and makes tech still worth mining but not really worth fighting over

I don't even really like the method where tech is left as the bottleneck, I would prefer it be moved to an r64, but that'd be more difficult to jam into a minor patch


10:1 alchemy does seem to be "spinning the dials and see what happens". CCP has a tendency to overdo things once the get going nerfing something.

I was hoping for something a bit more subtle with alchemy, it being the first step, and something more comprehensive and game changing down the road.

Ah well.


Its hard to do something comprehensive, becuase the need for tech is so basic. Like invention is a simple way to deal with T2BPOs but our need for t2 items is so basic, that is what we are stuck with. I would like to do something more comprehensive with T2BPOs as well as tech, but the general flow of items, or how people need that item too much would have to be different.

I kind of like these changes in tech, becuase it might allow more changes to invention. We will now have tech in a different way then we use to, so all of a sudden, T2 item flow might change. and make invention look really old or simple as well.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#131 - 2012-07-28 12:34:05 UTC
So the big reason to not to redistribute moons is because some people have a database of current moons and they don't want to make a new one..... I hope to GOD they are not serious. Talk about afraid of change. I don't scan moons, but if it is truly that bad, ask that it is improved. Ohhhhhh wait, then it will be easy for others to make a database or the database pointless.

Adapt. Nothing wrong with a little unknown. Or does that scare you.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
Pipa Porto
#132 - 2012-07-28 12:37:24 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
So the big reason to not to redistribute moons is because some people have a database of current moons and they don't want to make a new one..... I hope to GOD they are not serious. Talk about afraid of change. I don't scan moons, but if it is truly that bad, ask that it is improved. Ohhhhhh wait, then it will be easy for others to make a database or the database pointless.

Adapt. Nothing wrong with a little unknown. Or does that scare you.



Quick, how many Mineable Moons are there in EVE?

A: Around 160,000


Nobody has a complete database of them all. Goonswarm is the closest, and they've been working on it for half a decade now.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#133 - 2012-07-28 12:43:01 UTC
I never said complete database.

Since they have put work into making one, we should not mess with anything that would nullify this work. Is that what I am hearing?

I don't care if there are 1 million moons, you don't need to know about every moon in the universe.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#134 - 2012-07-28 12:44:57 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I never said complete database.

Since they have put work into making one, we should not mess with anything that would nullify this work. Is that what I am hearing?

I don't care if there are 1 million moons, you don't need to know about every moon in the universe.


A member of the Republic Military School doesn't need to know, but a sov-holding alliance does. Especially the poor people who end up scanning these moons.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Richard Desturned
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#135 - 2012-07-28 12:45:11 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
So the big reason to not to redistribute moons is because some people have a database of current moons and they don't want to make a new one..... I hope to GOD they are not serious. Talk about afraid of change. I don't scan moons, but if it is truly that bad, ask that it is improved. Ohhhhhh wait, then it will be easy for others to make a database or the database pointless.

Adapt. Nothing wrong with a little unknown. Or does that scare you.



"i, who have never scanned a moon, have valuable insight on moon scanning"

npc alts have no opinions worth consideration
Pipa Porto
#136 - 2012-07-28 12:45:40 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I never said complete database.

Since they have put work into making one, we should not mess with anything that would nullify this work. Is that what I am hearing?

I don't care if there are 1 million moons, you don't need to know about every moon in the universe.


Yes you do. Every moon is potentially valuable, so every moon would need to be re-scanned.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#137 - 2012-07-28 12:48:58 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I never said complete database.

Since they have put work into making one, we should not mess with anything that would nullify this work. Is that what I am hearing?

I don't care if there are 1 million moons, you don't need to know about every moon in the universe.


Yes you do. Every moon is potentially valuable, so every moon would need to be re-scanned.


Asuming that the mid-grade moon scanning probe was used & taking in to account flight & recording times, how many man-hours would you estimate that it would take to re-scan 160k moons every 3 months?

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#138 - 2012-07-28 12:49:43 UTC
So afraid of unknown. We might not be mining the most profitable moon..... Oh no. I need to know I am playing eve right (by the spreadsheet). Sigh.


And yes I don't scan moons, as I pointed out, But I understand it is painful. So ask for it to be improved. But again I know you don't want that , it will erase the "hard" work previously done.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie
Pipa Porto
#139 - 2012-07-28 12:53:28 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Pipa Porto wrote:
Lady Zarrina wrote:
I never said complete database.

Since they have put work into making one, we should not mess with anything that would nullify this work. Is that what I am hearing?

I don't care if there are 1 million moons, you don't need to know about every moon in the universe.


Yes you do. Every moon is potentially valuable, so every moon would need to be re-scanned.


Asuming that the mid-grade moon scanning probe was used & taking in to account flight & recording times, how many man-hours would you estimate that it would take to re-scan 160k moons every 3 months?


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1708944#post1708944

I did a calculation including only flight times between moons. It discounted recording time, discounted the probe time at the end of each system, discounted resupply. Everything but the time it takes to align away, warp, land, align to moon, shot probe.

5300 Man Hours.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto
Pipa Porto
#140 - 2012-07-28 12:55:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Pipa Porto
Lady Zarrina wrote:
So afraid of unknown. We might not be mining the most profitable moon..... Oh no. I need to know I am playing eve right (by the spreadsheet). Sigh.



Minimum 5300 Man hours every time it shuffles. And I made enough assumptions that I'd be comfortable quadrupling that to get a reasonable estimate. Then comes moving POSes around. Have you ever set up or taken down a Deathstar POS?


Moon scanning is also necessary to plan your attacks on a new region. So every time someone invades someone else's space that they haven't held before, you have scouts hunting down moons.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto