These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

DNS Black for CSM8
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kalissis
#41 - 2012-11-30 05:46:59 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:

4) Combine with article points (1 cyno per grid, 1 bridge per cyno)


What article are you talking about? DNS BLACK did not write any of this.
Back to the matter at hand, you can't make a tumor better by not removing it. Just remove the whole damn thing and be done with one of the many bad decisions ever made by CCP.
No More Heroes
Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#42 - 2012-11-30 06:06:54 UTC  |  Edited by: No More Heroes
1. Isk Pooling (moon goo) ~The solution is to rebalance moons so that the bottleneck is a R64 once again. R64s are not evenly distributed, but they are not regional like R32's and R8's (a region generally only has one type of R8 and R32, while it can have all kinds of R16 or R64 moons). But as CCP apparently intends to move away from moon mining as a point source of income (a serious mistake that eliminates the one remaining financial incentive for a sovwar) they may see fixing this error as not worth the effort. This is a mistake: the old system of R64 distribution created great incentives to fight and created a smooth transition in region value. A new system is likely to suffer from the usual malaise: the key elements of the system slip off into Soon™ , either never coming or consuming an inordinate amount of development time. (Citation)

2. The Blob ~Cynojammers anyone? 500 dudes are still gonna show up on your door step if they wanna take a dump on your lawn. Sure it would make for more deployments and more hassle but death clones and jump clones negate this whole argument about needing to keep close to and hug holdings. I still have combat ships in Delve for crissakes.

3. Moon Farming vs. Moon Mining~ This mostly has to do with the travesty that is industry in 0.0 which we have been banging the drum for long and loud. Virtually everything in 0.0 is brought in with jump freighters, built in empire and bought in Jita. Some people realize this and argue for the nerfing of the jump freighter. Those people are idiots. The jump freighter is the only thing keeping 0.0 markets alive: in the current system 0.0 industry simply cannot function or compete. Every tier of manufacturing is broken in 0.0.

It’s well known that industry in 0.0 is broken: we’ve heard platitudes from CCP about fixing it. However, it does not appear that CCP, or indeed most EVE players in general, understand why fixing industry in 0.0 is vitally important. It’s not just necessary to fix industry to please those who like building ships or the like (a small minority of people in 0.0). The broken status of 0.0’s industry affects everyone. (Citation)

4. Force Projection "You can’t have the 300 Spartans holding off the Persians at Thermopylae if there are no Hot Gates because the Persians can cyno into Athens. Note, I am not asking for the removal of the ability to build Strategic Jump Bridge Networks or Jump Freighters, Supercarriers/Titans/Cap Ships to jump a cyno at all in this, only for the removal of the titan bridge." ~ Cynojam Athens? I still don't see how this will change anything in todays EVE. When key systems are cynojammed we travel there the old fashioned way and take down the jammer. If there is a fleet waiting for us at the target system we have a goodfight (conflict!) and then take down the jammer. Besides making Titans totally useless, removing the titan bridge is not going to stop the Persians from showing up on your doorstep.

"Having to navigate through, to utilize the environment and the EVE universe, is and always will be the greatest conflict driver"
Oh god no. Travel in this game is tedious and boring. Destroying or capturing value drives conflict in this game.

If we get a ping saying: Hey guys- soandso is leading a roam to x,y,z formup is here with these shiptypes. 50-60 dudes will login and get in fleet. If we get a ping saying: HOSTILE TITANS TACKLED get in fleet now! now! now! 600 dudes will login and get in fleet. Destroying or capturing assets drives conflict in this game.

.
Elzon1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-11-30 06:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Elzon1
Asuka Solo wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Stuff.


So what you purpose is just to use 5titans in a pos for bridging the same fleet as currently done by only 1... You sir should rethink that, just another thing that makes it dumb and does not solve the problem AT ALL is not gonna help.


Nope. Read it again.

1) Reduce the fuel the titan can bridge with
2) Reduce the number of ships it can bridge
3) Nerf bridge refueling
4) Combine with article points (1 cyno per grid, 1 bridge per cyno)
5) Add cooldowns

You'd need closer to 10 titans to move 256 people and even then, it would be:

1) 1 Titan at a time, pushing no more than 25-50 ships (depending on size and fuel required for bridge) every few minutes
2) Take a few cycles to move the whole gang per titan, resulting in hotdrops in waves instead of 1 giant blob


If you want to take it even further.... prevent the bridge from being activated within 10km or more of a POS shield.


Well, lets take a look at something: EVE Master Class - Jump Portals

Isn't DNS a dedicated black ops gang? How could he let the jump bridge fuel calculations miss him?

You don't need to get rid of the Titan jump portal entirely, you just have to adjust it's fuel usage.

Take a look at some numbers from the article:

Jump Portal Mass Consumption Factor (aka MCF)
Jump Fuel Conservation (JFC_level)
base amount of fuel the Titan/Black Op ships needs to jump itself (base fuel cost)

Mass * MCF * ((base fuel cost) - (base fuel cost * 0.10 * (JFC_level))) = fuel required / light year

Example 1 - A 1 million Kg ship using the jump portal of a Titan with a MCF of 1e-9 which itself requires 1000 isotopes per light year operated by a pilot with Jump Fuel Conservation IV will require:

1,000,000 * 0.000000001 * 1000 - (1000 * 0.10 * 4) = 0.6 isotopes / light year

Example 2 - A 1 million Kg ship using the jump portal of a Black Ops with MCF of 1.8e-7 which itself requires 300 isotopers per light year operated by a pilot with Jump Fuel Conservation IV will require:

1,000,000 * 0.00000018 * 300 - (300 * 0.10 * 4) = 32.4 isotopes / light year


Ship Class------------------Approx mass----------Black Ops Isotopes / lyr ---------Titan Isotopes / lyr

Frigate-----------------------1,100,000 Kg--------------------35.64---------------------------------0.66
Cruiser----------------------12,000,000 Kg------------------388.8----------------------------------7.2
Battleship------------------103,000,000 Kg-----------------3337.2---------------------------------61.8



See the difference between Black Ops jump portal and the Titan's?

See how the Titan jump portal can portal through a LOT more mass?

So, if you want to change the effectiveness of the Titan jump portal you need only change one number.

That number being the MCF of the jump portal generator (0.000000001). That's all you need to change.



Now, about tech moons.

First off alchemy was established to help with the problem. My corp is involved in profiting off platinum technite alchemy. It's not much, but its something. Alchemy, along with the changes to mining ships, has helped to deter the manipulation of Tech prices. The price of platinum technite is around half of what it once was. So, that changes so far to the platinum technite market have been useful in changing it's profitability and it's price manipulation.

Now, there is a further change coming December 4th that few have come to realize. That change being that of the new logistics cruisers. Why the new logistics cruisers? Well think about it, what do we use now to rep most subcaps in battle? That's right TECH 2 logistics ships! And what is used in their construction? That's right, platinum technite!

Seeing as the tech 2 logistic ships are regularly used in combat they tend to be priority targets and tend to die often. Of all the tech 2 ships on the battlefield these ships tend to be the most numerous and have a fairly high cost to them when lost. As a result these ships tend to be a part of any major alliance's ship replacement program. Some of the money to replace such ships tends to go to the owners of tech moons. Starting to see how the new tech 1 logistic ships are going to make an impact here?

Not only are tech 1 logistic ships far more affordable isk wise they also don't use any platinum technite in their construction! First, this means that alliances may no longer need to replace the new logistic ships considering their lower costs. Second, since the new logistic ships are tech 1 there is little to no money going to the owners of tech moons when they are replaced.


In conclusion, the owners of tech moons may see much lower profits from their tech moons in the near future. This upcoming change significantly reduces the demand on platinum technite whilst the supply remains the same. Perhaps we will see the price of platinum technite fall to that which allows it's production through alchemy. Perhaps not. However, either way we will see a significant reduction in the price of platinum technite.

Also, in the future it seems CCP plans on implementing ship based moon mineral mining. If things aren't under control by then, they will be after that change. As long as CCP does it right, ship based moon mineral mining will be the final nail in the coffin of the massive tech moon passive income streams.
TZeer
BURN EDEN
No Therapy
#44 - 2012-11-30 08:36:29 UTC  |  Edited by: TZeer
Elzon1 wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Stuff.


So what you purpose is just to use 5titans in a pos for bridging the same fleet as currently done by only 1... You sir should rethink that, just another thing that makes it dumb and does not solve the problem AT ALL is not gonna help.


Nope. Read it again.

1) Reduce the fuel the titan can bridge with
2) Reduce the number of ships it can bridge
3) Nerf bridge refueling
4) Combine with article points (1 cyno per grid, 1 bridge per cyno)
5) Add cooldowns

You'd need closer to 10 titans to move 256 people and even then, it would be:

1) 1 Titan at a time, pushing no more than 25-50 ships (depending on size and fuel required for bridge) every few minutes
2) Take a few cycles to move the whole gang per titan, resulting in hotdrops in waves instead of 1 giant blob


If you want to take it even further.... prevent the bridge from being activated within 10km or more of a POS shield.


Well, lets take a look at something: EVE Master Class - Jump Portals

Isn't DNS a dedicated black ops gang? How could he let the jump bridge fuel calculations miss him?

You don't need to get rid of the Titan jump portal entirely, you just have to adjust it's fuel usage.

Take a look at some numbers from the article:

Jump Portal Mass Consumption Factor (aka MCF)
Jump Fuel Conservation (JFC_level)
base amount of fuel the Titan/Black Op ships needs to jump itself (base fuel cost)

Mass * MCF * ((base fuel cost) - (base fuel cost * 0.10 * (JFC_level))) = fuel required / light year

Example 1 - A 1 million Kg ship using the jump portal of a Titan with a MCF of 1e-9 which itself requires 1000 isotopes per light year operated by a pilot with Jump Fuel Conservation IV will require:

1,000,000 * 0.000000001 * 1000 - (1000 * 0.10 * 4) = 0.6 isotopes / light year

Example 2 - A 1 million Kg ship using the jump portal of a Black Ops with MCF of 1.8e-7 which itself requires 300 isotopers per light year operated by a pilot with Jump Fuel Conservation IV will require:

1,000,000 * 0.00000018 * 300 - (300 * 0.10 * 4) = 32.4 isotopes / light year


Ship Class------------------Approx mass----------Black Ops Isotopes / lyr ---------Titan Isotopes / lyr

Frigate-----------------------1,100,000 Kg--------------------35.64---------------------------------0.66
Cruiser----------------------12,000,000 Kg------------------388.8----------------------------------7.2
Battleship------------------103,000,000 Kg-----------------3337.2---------------------------------61.8



See the difference between Black Ops jump portal and the Titan's?

See how the Titan jump portal can portal through a LOT more mass?

So, if you want to change the effectiveness of the Titan jump portal you need only change one number.

That number being the MCF of the jump portal generator (0.000000001). That's all you need to change.






You hit the nail there with fuel consumption.

It's ridiculous that the titan is that fuel efficient.

Another small example:

H-W9TY - M-OEE8 4.274 lightyears

A black ops bs bridge 1 manticore: 169 Isotopes
A titan bridging a manticore: 3 Isotopes

For the amount of fuel 1 Black op need to use to bridge 1 bomber, the Titan can bridge 56!!

So a ship that is designed to bridge a small selection of specialized ships, use 56 times more fuel then a ship that can bridge any ship in the game.

As it is, the Titan is to fuel efficient. Imagine the restrictions that suddenly would pop up if it was as greedy on fuel as the black ops?

Also, why is there no difference in the fuel needed to jump the actual ship when you compare carriers, dreads, supercarriers and titans? They all use the same amount.
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2012-11-30 09:09:35 UTC
I will put up an extremely lenghty post on the forums within the next couple of days (unless I get distracted by other things in the meantime) regarding my own thoughts on the major issues EVE is having - simply cause I am getting a tad tired of repeating myself on random threads regarding these issues over and over. Some may already know some of the parts of what it will be about.

So far I'm already up to 3 A4 pages and that is just the frigging beginning Ugh

Even though it will all be purely my own opinion I feel that the extreme detail (and thus the wall of text) is necessary. Let me already say that a lot that I will write about will also be in parallell with what is said in the open letter. I fully agree with the listed concerns.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#46 - 2012-11-30 09:45:24 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
1. Isk Pooling (moon goo) ~The solution is to rebalance moons so that the bottleneck is a R64 once again. R64s are not evenly distributed, but they are not regional like R32's and R8's (a region generally only has one type of R8 and R32, while it can have all kinds of R16 or R64 moons). But as CCP apparently intends to move away from moon mining as a point source of income (a serious mistake that eliminates the one remaining financial incentive for a sovwar) they may see fixing this error as not worth the effort. This is a mistake: the old system of R64 distribution created great incentives to fight and created a smooth transition in region value. A new system is likely to suffer from the usual malaise: the key elements of the system slip off into Soon™ , either never coming or consuming an inordinate amount of development time.


Returning back to the old moon bootleneck may be slightly better than the 'all in one region' bottle neck, but it is still not enough. It is time to return the game back into the unknown and open up back into those willing to explore and search for fortune and glory. Having every valueable moon found, documented and keep them privy to the already powerful coalitions and alliances is a colossal mistake. Even if they did a mixup and changed all the locations, unless the new system stays fresh and dynamic we will be right back to the same issues in a year or two.

Fortunes should be for those willing to put forth the time and effort into aquiring them, not because some power block looked up where an R64 or Tech moon was on DOTlan website in 1.2 seconds with the only effort being putting down the potato chip to hit the enter key. The game needs to be more than that. The players deserve more than that.

And the entire process should not be tedious and comma endusing with sheer boredom. Change, revamp, recode, redo... Do whatever it takes to make the process enjoyable and rewarding for those willing to pick up an old dusty treasure map and torch and give us the feeling of adventure again. Now!
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-11-30 09:45:53 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
2. The Blob ~Cynojammers anyone? 500 dudes are still gonna show up on your door step if they wanna take a dump on your lawn. Sure it would make for more deployments and more hassle but death clones and jump clones negate this whole argument about needing to keep close to and hug holdings. I still have combat ships in Delve for crissakes.


Yes we all know about jump clones and 500 determined guys. Jump clones are one of the problems that adds to the power projection issue. Jump clones should be used more frequently than some arbitrary 25 hour period and more than just some instant power projection mechanic or an excuse so you can't risk those precious learning clone implants.

Jump clones should excel in and around the idea of using the right tool for the right job. And while those 500 guys are jumping 50+ jumps to take a dump on someones lawn, they subject themselves to farm more danger than cynoing (and avoiding all risk in between point A and point B) to the destination of that peskly evil 7 man corp who just put up a small tower in some trash low sec system to do some ice mining. Perhaps traveling all those jumps day in and day out will not be worth being blue to that other allaince on the other side of the map. Perhaps, brace yourself, you should look a bit closer to home for targets. The phrase risk averse it tossed out a lot these days and mostly be null power blocks all the while having a 5 mile long blue list. There is even a neutral blue term for those who 'reset' others, but still are too afraid to so much as trade anti-matter rounds without some lost list of rules of engagement that would make Hello Kitty look like it came out of some hellish war novel.

No More Heroes wrote:
3. Moon Farming vs. Moon Mining~ This mostly has to do with the travesty that is industry in 0.0 which we have been banging the drum for long and loud. Virtually everything in 0.0 is brought in with jump freighters, built in empire and bought in Jita. Some people realize this and argue for the nerfing of the jump freighter. Those people are idiots. The jump freighter is the only thing keeping 0.0 markets alive: in the current system 0.0 industry simply cannot function or compete. Every tier of manufacturing is broken in 0.0.
It’s well known that industry in 0.0 is broken: we’ve heard platitudes from CCP about fixing it. However, it does not appear that CCP, or indeed most EVE players in general, understand why fixing industry in 0.0 is vitally important. It’s not just necessary to fix industry to please those who like building ships or the like (a small minority of people in 0.0). The broken status of 0.0’s industry affects everyone.


I agree that the jump freighter to and from Jita is the life line of null activity. It was CCP's bandaid on a shotgun wound years ago. Sadly they never got around to taking null industry to the hospital to get the proper surgery it needed. It is time for that surgery. Like now.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#48 - 2012-11-30 09:46:10 UTC
No More Heroes wrote:
4. Force Projection "You can’t have the 300 Spartans holding off the Persians at Thermopylae if there are no Hot Gates because the Persians can cyno into Athens. Note, I am not asking for the removal of the ability to build Strategic Jump Bridge Networks or Jump Freighters, Supercarriers/Titans/Cap Ships to jump a cyno at all in this, only for the removal of the titan bridge." ~ Cynojam Athens? I still don't see how this will change anything in todays EVE. When key systems are cynojammed we travel there the old fashioned way and take down the jammer. If there is a fleet waiting for us at the target system we have a goodfight (conflict!) and then take down the jammer. Besides making Titans totally useless, removing the titan bridge is not going to stop the Persians from showing up on your doorstep.


But it will give them a fighting chance. No one is claiming that 300 guys should be able to defeat 1 million. What the 300 want is the ability to make the 1 million bleed and suffer doing it. Is that too much to ask? Why are so many of you agaist this idea?

No More Heroes wrote:
"Having to navigate through, to utilize the environment and the EVE universe, is and always will be the greatest conflict driver"
Oh god no. Travel in this game is tedious and boring. Destroying or capturing value drives conflict in this game.


Sure it is tedious and boring... if you are 7 regions deep in a sea of blues. Don't like doing all that traveling? No one is forcing you. I strongly suggest you reevaluate your blue list and reset some that are closer if you want instant PvP. Stop trying to turn this game into WoT or LoL.

No More Heroes wrote:
If we get a ping saying: Hey guys- soandso is leading a roam to x,y,z formup is here with these shiptypes. 50-60 dudes will login and get in fleet. If we get a ping saying: HOSTILE TITANS TACKLED get in fleet now! now! now! 600 dudes will login and get in fleet.


Once again, anyone who burys themselves in 60,000+ blues and then bitches about having to travel far to get a fight is just derp. That being said, there should be far more incentive to have it out with neighbors that are more local than trying to figure out who can set + standings the fastest and brag about who ran the most sanctums that day.

Who knew that the most risk adverse players in the game were these super coalitions in null and not high sec carebears.
Alice Saki
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#49 - 2012-11-30 09:46:28 UTC
Me for CSM XD XD

FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - Currenly rebuilding gaming machine, I will Return.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-11-30 10:17:17 UTC
TZeer wrote:
Also, why is there no difference in the fuel needed to jump the actual ship when you compare carriers, dreads, supercarriers and titans? They all use the same amount.


Even if you quadruple the fuel requirements of titans, they will still travel the span of the map without refueling since they can hold 400k units of isotopes in the fuel bay alone. They also have 100k m3 corp hangars and 10k+ m3 cargoholds, so holding massive amounts of fuel isn't a detriment /at all/

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
TZeer
BURN EDEN
No Therapy
#51 - 2012-11-30 11:27:16 UTC
Andski wrote:
TZeer wrote:
Also, why is there no difference in the fuel needed to jump the actual ship when you compare carriers, dreads, supercarriers and titans? They all use the same amount.


Even if you quadruple the fuel requirements of titans, they will still travel the span of the map without refueling since they can hold 400k units of isotopes in the fuel bay alone. They also have 100k m3 corp hangars and 10k+ m3 cargoholds, so holding massive amounts of fuel isn't a detriment /at all/



But if you increased the fuel they need, you also increase the cost. Looking at the mass of the Avatar versus Archon, it would be roughly double the fuel to jump the Titan versus the carrier.

But the most important one would be the fuel needed to bridge.

The covert op jump bridge uses 56 times more fuel than the titan bridge. And it can only bridge a small selection of specialized ships.

A black ops with 1000m3 fuel bay can bridge about 5 Rapiers out to it's max range, you can start adding cargo expanders etc, but it will in no way be able to fight. And the amount extra you can bridge is not that big.

A Titan with the same amount of fuel, can bridge 27 Rokh's and 10 Scimitars, or 276 Rapiers....


If the Titan was as greedy as the black ops on fuel when it was bridging. I think people would think twice before shelling out hundred of million of isk to bridge people all over the place.
The cost for bridging that gang of 27 Rokh's and 10 Scimis would go from roughly 3,6 mil, and up to 202 million.

It would no longer be a module that everyone would use nonstop, it would turn into a module that you actually had to think about if it is worth it.

- Is it worth spending 200 mil to hotdrop a random roaming gang?
- Is it worth it jumping a 200 man gang through 3 Titan bridges to grap a tech moon?

The cost would be to high. And the alliances would actually have to live in the area where they had tech moons. It would no longer be profitable to have tech moons stretching over multiple regions if you had to use 3-4 titanbridges every time you had to defend it.

I'm not saying what the price/amount should be. But if it was a needy as the covert jump portal the use would somewhat balance itself out. You would also get logistical challenges as we already have with the black ops.

Let's use H-W to M-O as an example:

With current mechanics you could jump a 100 man BS gang from H-W to M-O 47 times, If you filled the corp hangar and the fuel hangar with fuel.

With a Jita price of 512 Isk per unit on Oxygen Isotopes it will cost roughly 11,5 mil each time you bridge that 100 man BS gang.

If it used as much a the covert jump portal, you would be looking at 668mil, every time you would drop a 100 man big BS gang. The titan would not even be able to hold all that fuel on one go.

Now, I'm not saying thats the amount it should use, but I think you get the idea. Increase the amount of fuel needed and people will think about cost and the logistical work behind it.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#52 - 2012-11-30 12:33:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
TZeer wrote:
But if you increased the fuel they need, you also increase the cost. Looking at the mass of the Avatar versus Archon, it would be roughly double the fuel to jump the Titan versus the carrier.


The cost is irrelevant since isotope prices have hit the rock bottom since the Mackinaw buff. Keep in mind that every supercapital fleet in the game still managed fine, despite most being heavy on Gallente hulls, when we interdicted blue ice in late 2011. The extra logistical burden from handling more fuel would not be a big deal and even if titan jump portals required as much fuel as those of blackops, their fuel bays are 60x the size.

Also, blackops BS operate in tandem with blockade runners to carry fuel. You know this.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#53 - 2012-11-30 12:53:46 UTC
Instant teleportation is killing this game

You think of x y z coordinates and your opponent needs to guess it to find you. Or wait 15 mins to scan you down.

Only coinciding coordinates that may lead to PvP are gates and station, timeframe - align time, must guess which of four gates at what time and exactly within 2-5 seconds.

Omg? Can this game be more random? Warp engine = instant teleportation guessing game.

Playing scannner games is like guessing random number between 0 and 1 000 000 and asking questions, 500 000, is it more or less? less, is it 250 000? more, is it 375? etc... This takes time, sometimes up to a minute.

Activating cloak or warping to safe spot only takes 2 - 5 secs.

Eve is a game of random immunity and biased impunity.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
TZeer
BURN EDEN
No Therapy
#54 - 2012-11-30 13:32:02 UTC
Andski wrote:
TZeer wrote:
But if you increased the fuel they need, you also increase the cost. Looking at the mass of the Avatar versus Archon, it would be roughly double the fuel to jump the Titan versus the carrier.


The cost is irrelevant since isotope prices have hit the rock bottom since the Mackinaw buff. Keep in mind that every supercapital fleet in the game still managed fine, despite most being heavy on Gallente hulls, when we interdicted blue ice in late 2011. The extra logistical burden from handling more fuel would not be a big deal and even if titan jump portals required as much fuel as those of blackops, their fuel bays are 60x the size.

Also, blackops BS operate in tandem with blockade runners to carry fuel. You know this.


So what you are saying is that it would not matter if the cost for bridging 100 BS 4,2 lightyears went form 11,5 mil and up to 650 mil??

And it would not be a big deal if jumping 100 BS would empty out the entire titan of fuel?
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#55 - 2012-11-30 14:26:42 UTC
TZeer wrote:
So what you are saying is that it would not matter if the cost for bridging 100 BS 4,2 lightyears went form 11,5 mil and up to 650 mil??

And it would not be a big deal if jumping 100 BS would empty out the entire titan of fuel?


Making titan bridges suck as much as blackops bridges is not really a solution.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
TZeer
BURN EDEN
No Therapy
#56 - 2012-11-30 15:18:32 UTC
Andski wrote:
TZeer wrote:
So what you are saying is that it would not matter if the cost for bridging 100 BS 4,2 lightyears went form 11,5 mil and up to 650 mil??

And it would not be a big deal if jumping 100 BS would empty out the entire titan of fuel?


Making titan bridges suck as much as blackops bridges is not really a solution.



I'm not saying it should suck as the blackops bridges.

But it should use considerable more fuel then it does today. Cost should be a factor to consider when bridging.

I feel blackops bridges work quite ok. It has limited use, it's a logistical effort to use over long distances and the range is okish. It would be nice if the range could be increased so you could at least jump over a regional gate here and there. But those negative factors also keep it from being overused. Is it worth it? What do we gain from it , etc.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#57 - 2012-11-30 15:29:57 UTC
I would support DNS Black.

Stand up guy.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Gnaw LF
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#58 - 2012-11-30 16:36:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Gnaw LF
TZeer wrote:

You hit the nail there with fuel consumption.

It's ridiculous that the titan is that fuel efficient.

Another small example:

H-W9TY - M-OEE8 4.274 lightyears

A black ops bs bridge 1 manticore: 169 Isotopes
A titan bridging a manticore: 3 Isotopes

For the amount of fuel 1 Black op need to use to bridge 1 bomber, the Titan can bridge 56!!

So a ship that is designed to bridge a small selection of specialized ships, use 56 times more fuel then a ship that can bridge any ship in the game.

As it is, the Titan is to fuel efficient. Imagine the restrictions that suddenly would pop up if it was as greedy on fuel as the black ops?

Also, why is there no difference in the fuel needed to jump the actual ship when you compare carriers, dreads, supercarriers and titans? They all use the same amount.





The Black Ops also gets the ability to cyno into Black Ops Cyno, which unlike the Regular Cyno is a 30 second action that does not show up on the overview. You also get to cyno into Cyno Jammed systems. Also, if the Titan efficiency is the reason for "broken" null sec, then you really need to state it that way. There is a difference between increased cost of bridging and complete elimination of bridging. Thirdly, actions speak louder then words, DNS Black had a pretty healthy alliance going on at one point until he went schitzo kicked everyone out and run it into the ground. He is NOT a valid candidate for CSM.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2012-11-30 17:11:38 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
Thirdly, actions speak louder then words, DNS Black had a pretty healthy alliance going on at one point until he went schitzo kicked everyone out and run it into the ground. He is NOT a valid candidate for CSM.

If this is a moral rule we should all follow when selecting who to vote for then there would not be an eligible candidate. Ever.

We need CSM candidates who care about the game as a whole and not run based on some personal agenda on what best servers their power block.
Gnaw LF
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#60 - 2012-11-30 17:21:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Gnaw LF
Marlona Sky wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
Thirdly, actions speak louder then words, DNS Black had a pretty healthy alliance going on at one point until he went schitzo kicked everyone out and run it into the ground. He is NOT a valid candidate for CSM.

If this is a moral rule we should all follow when selecting who to vote for then there would not be an eligible candidate. Ever.

We need CSM candidates who care about the game as a whole and not run based on some personal agenda on what best servers their power block.



There will be plenty of eligible candidates from plenty of alliances. You know the people who don't do Black Ops Hot Drops all day long and then complain about Titans or lack of pew on gates. The sort of people who do care about the game but are not hypocrites. Go back an re-read DNS Black's article again, only this time keep in mind that CCP is already aware and working on the Moon Goo issues and that DNS Black and his alliance stand to gain from removal of Titan Bridges. Wouldn't it be nice to get candidates who are willing to compromise on issues or take a position that would benefit the community as a whole?