These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just don’t call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog

First post First post First post
Author
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#761 - 2013-05-03 17:11:30 UTC
Ok, so then don't spoil your otherwise reasonable, though ridiculously and unnecessarily long, arguments with empty hyperbolic threats and doomcalling

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Red Frog Rufen
Red Frog Freight
Red-Frog
#762 - 2013-05-03 17:23:09 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.


Thank you, this is quite re-assuring! :D
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#763 - 2013-05-03 17:28:32 UTC
Tootenh'amon wrote:
Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect.

buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to.

But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting.

Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died?

EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it.

Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#764 - 2013-05-03 17:31:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Bugsy VanHalen
Varius Xeral wrote:
Ok, so then don't spoil your otherwise reasonable, though ridiculously and unnecessarily long, arguments with empty hyperbolic threats and doomcalling

LOL,
Yes I get your point,

And yes, my posts are often excessively long.

Sorry I try to keep them short but they almost always hit the character limit.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#765 - 2013-05-03 17:33:48 UTC
Red Frog Rufen wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.


Thank you, this is quite re-assuring! :D

Yes,
I am glad to see neither red frog or black frog will be hurt by this expansion.

I may need their services when I move back to null sec.
Tootenh'amon
#766 - 2013-05-03 17:37:43 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
Tootenh'amon wrote:
Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect.

buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to.

But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting.

Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died?

EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it.

Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else.


Killing miners in 0.0 who take calculated risks for bigger rewards isn't really ganking, it's regular pvp. As for high sec nothing realy changes, warping to an anomaly isn't going to be easier than warping to a belt anyways.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#767 - 2013-05-03 17:46:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Bugsy VanHalen
Tootenh'amon wrote:
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
Tootenh'amon wrote:
Maybe that's not its intended purpose, but could be a useful side efect.

buffing ganking is never useful in any MMO. I believe ganking is a necessary evil, and can never really be stopped even if you wanted to.

But making it easier is not needed, and will only result in more carebears rage quiting.

Age of Conan was a great PVP game, but they promoted ganking and made ganking and spawn camping very easy to do and impossible to avoid. After all hyboria is supposed to be a harsh dangerous play. (sound familiar) yet that game died?

EVE is a far better game than AoC ever could have been. But ganking is ganking, and carebears hate it.

Ganking needs to have a risk vs reward balance just like everything else.


Killing miners in 0.0 who take calculated risks for bigger rewards isn't really ganking, it's regular pvp. As for high sec nothing realy changes, warping to an anomaly isn't going to be easier than warping to a belt anyways.

NO SORRY,

Regular PVP is fighting other players who fight back.

Ganking is a form of PVP, but the lowest form, and not worthy of the PVP flag.

Attacking another that has zero chance of fighting back or defending themself is ganking. High sec, low sec, null sec, W-space, it does not matter. Ganking is ganking.

Not that ganking is a bad thing, but it is not a form of game play that needs any help.

I ask who is the braver pilot, The miner who goes out in null sec to mine ore at a great personal risk, Or the ganker that goes out hunting a type of ship that can not fight back?

There is no honor in ganking, it does not make you a better PVPer.

It is fun though, which is all that really matters.
Tootenh'amon
#768 - 2013-05-03 17:52:34 UTC
So by your opinnion no miner should ever be killed in any way?
Skex Relbore
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#769 - 2013-05-03 18:16:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Skex Relbore
Tootenh'amon wrote:
Flash Phoenix wrote:
OK maybe I missed something, but what is the PURPOSE of the grav sights no longer needing to be found with probes ? Regardless of location in hi sec, low sec or null or worm holes. No skills needed to access ores or the miners in them, No effort or time needed to access ores or the miners in them. Why the lowering of effort and time to access. What happened to more effort, more reward ?


Maybe it's an effort to help pvpers combat botters? Instead of having to scan the site they can just go directional-warp to the site-kill. Human miners will always have the advantage of intel channels as a warning. Bots-won't.



Actually the problem is that bots have the advantage in that situation. The bot can constantly scan local and will always boogie out of dodge if a neut shows up, There is also no reason to think that a bot can't watch intel channels for key info either (that or the botter just puts their own scouts in adjacent systems.

A player on the other hand gets distracted or spaces out or has to run take a **** and will occasionally miss that neut in local (know that's how I tend to lose ratting ships that and forgetting to turn the tank on). So if it is an effort to cause grief to botters then it is an extremely misguided and ill conceived one.

Not saying it doesn't need changing, but Ice mining was the one resource harvesting activity that put humans and bots on a more or less even footing. The low level of manual interaction required was so minimal that the bot gained less advantage from it's ability to respond instantly to change.
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#770 - 2013-05-03 18:42:01 UTC
Tootenh'amon wrote:
So by your opinnion no miner should ever be killed in any way?

I did not say that.

Ganking is a necessary and permanent part of every MMO, whether the developers support it or not. But Gankers do not need help ganking, there targets are generally far inferior to them, why should they need help.

I said ganking is the lowest form of PVP. it has no honor. In war who is the honorable solder, the one killing other solders? Or the one killing women and children?

Ganking can be fun. But why should CCP make it even easier to find targets to gank. There is loads of PVP available in EVE if you want it. But real PVP, unlike Ganking, puts you in a situation where you might die. Try it some time. Wining a fight that you had a chance of losing is much more rewarding than winning a fight you had no chance of losing.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#771 - 2013-05-03 18:58:32 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
EvilweaselSA wrote:
in other words, you feel entitled to success and are unhappy you may have to adapt to changing circumstances

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal


I am unhappy to adapt and give CCP $90 less a month, because I really want to see EvE get its 20 years mark. I know you don't care for them (like you don't care for me), but hey, world spins round like that.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#772 - 2013-05-03 20:06:36 UTC  |  Edited by: EI Digin
How in the world can you run an unprofitable highsec mining operation? What kind of expenses does a highsec player have? Especially a miner who does not need to purchase ammo or new ships very often.
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#773 - 2013-05-03 20:12:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Cygnet Lythanea
EI Digin wrote:
How in the world can you run an unprofitable highsec mining operation? What kind of expenses does a highsec player have? Especially a miner who does not need to purchase ammo or new ships very often.



Expenses: not so much, (mining crystals, drones, hulkageddon, corp member paychecks for showing up) but compare time and income in mining to time and income in mission whoring, ratting, COSMOS, scan sites, or just about anything else (including other passive forms of isk generation like PI). It's the least profitable thing you can be doing, grant total (and frankly, even mission whoring, who buys ammo? Make your own or use lasers)


Tootenh'amon wrote:
You kill someone who loses something. It's not about honor, honor has been gone from eve years ago. PVP is shooting non-npcs, period.


Junior, if you think I lose something at my in game age and level of wealth if you manage to kill me (something goons have been failing at for.... five years or more now) you obviously are a noob. zomg, I lost a Bhaalgorn. There goes..... 0.012% of my total value. Woo.
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#774 - 2013-05-03 20:30:26 UTC
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
Expenses: not so much, (mining crystals, drones, hulkageddon, corp member paychecks for showing up) but compare time and income in mining to time and income in mission whoring, ratting, COSMOS, scan sites, or just about anything else (including other passive forms of isk generation like PI). It's the least profitable thing you can be doing, grant total (and frankly, even mission whoring, who buys ammo? Make your own or use lasers)


If you're into mining because you like mining, your favourite constructive and relaxing style of gameplay is still there, it just might take a little bit longer to get there.

If you're into it for the isk, I suggest you go get a second job at McDonalds and sell PLEX. It will probably get you farther in life to boot.
Bario Norte
Sky Net Industries
Artificial Intellagence
#775 - 2013-05-04 06:32:13 UTC
Loney wrote:
COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT

Overall I like all the changes suggested in the Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just don’t call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog... However I have a suggestion related to the ICE mining.

If CCP is reducing the ICE in HIGHSEC and giving more ORE incentive for players to move players to LOWSEC or NULLSEC then you need to do something about the COMPRESSION game mechanics.

Suggestions

1. Buff the RORQUAL stats for compression.
a. Increase the ICE/ORE HOLD by 100%.
b. Increase the COMPRESSION FACTORY SLOTS by 100%
c. Decrease the COMPRESSION TIME by 50%.

If my numbers are not realistic (I think they are) please do your own calculations and adjust them as necessary.

2. Create a POS module for ICE/ORE COMPRESSION.
a. Make it big like a Rorqual and take up a lot of CPU/POWER resources on the POS.
or
b. Make it small like a refinery so you can put several of them on a POS.

This could be done instead of changing the Rorqual stats or it can be done as a added feature/option.

Thanks,
Loney

COPY AND REPLY TO THIS IF YOU THINK ITS A GOOD IDEA SO THE DEVS WILL TAKE A SERIOUS LOOK AT IT


[
Something needs to be done with the Rorqual if they are doing all these changes to ICE and expect that 20% of the ICE is not going to be mined in highsec.

After the patch the HULK will roughly mine 200 blocks of ICE an hour with max skills and an implant... The rorqual can only compress roughly 320 blocks of ICE and hour... this is THE STUPIDEST THING EVER!

1.5 HULK TO ONE RORQUAL for compression of ICE... I CCP was trying to make this a group activity for mining in 0.0 but do you really expect a corporation of 32 Exhumer pilots to mine for 1 hour and then ALL 32 jump into a Rorqual and compress for 1 hour?

The Rorqual need a few things done... Make the Compression RATE of ICE EQUAL to the MINING rate of a HULK... then make the RORQUAL be able to support something more then 1.5 hulks... like each Rorqual should be able to support 10+ Hulks...

If you decrease the compression time by a little (by giving rorqual a compression bonus per level) and increase the number of slots to 10-11 for compression on the rorqual (either by flat number of slots or again a rorqual bonus per level) then it would make that much more sense.

Honestly the Tractor beam, scanner, and drone bonuses are total lame in my opionion and we could lose those to make up for the bonuses I suggested above.

Please do it.... so it can come out with this patch and not like 6 months later!!!!!
Bario Norte
Sky Net Industries
Artificial Intellagence
#776 - 2013-05-04 08:20:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Bario Norte
--
Bario Norte
Sky Net Industries
Artificial Intellagence
#777 - 2013-05-04 08:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Bario Norte
--
Bario Norte
Sky Net Industries
Artificial Intellagence
#778 - 2013-05-04 08:22:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Bario Norte
CCP Fozzie wrote:

  • We are not currently planning to improve ore or ice compression, including the rates of compression or Rorquals. We encourage those ice miners that outpace their Rorqual capacity to try selling the excess on local markets, I think they may find people willing to buy their products.

  • You say you are not "planning" changes... but ICE compression will be by far at a disadvantage... can you please take a look at just doing something about the ice compressions so its not like 1.5 HULKS for 1 Rorqual!!!

    Also, the "local market" as you stated will not buy the volume of ice that is mined in o.o even if prices are WAY LESS then jita prices. Furthermore, it does not solve the problem about how to get the ICE to so-called (0.0 market hub) from the mining system!

    Thanks.
    Vaerah Vahrokha
    Vahrokh Consulting
    #779 - 2013-05-04 09:14:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha
    Still amazed both by CCP and the "pro players": always flaunting the PLAYER DRIVEN oh holy sandbox and then both ready to give up for the low hanging fruit solution and put in a...


    ... fake, unrealistic, cheap TIMER. A TIMER in a sandbox. Next week we read WoW became a sandbox too, they are full of timers and instances locks after all.


    Just undo the barges buffs and let PLAYERS kill miners and define supply, demand and market price. THAT's an imperfect yet sandboxy and realistic solution, not this farce.
    Mars Theran
    Foreign Interloper
    #780 - 2013-05-04 09:24:17 UTC
    Nice. Good to see some overhauls of current systems and shake up of the economy. Smile
    zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub