Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Well that screws over the black ops, it's difficult to bridge ships with it as it is, but now with increase in fuel need it will be even more insane.

For the love of Bob, don't let this change affect black ops, actually black ops should hold at least 5 times the fuel it does now.

Good direction, but bad idea.
This will hit small players, especially using JF.

Better way - increase fuel usage :
- carriers 50% , increase fuel bay by 50%
- supercarriers 100%, increase fuel bay 50% ( yes 50%)
- Titans 150% , increase fuel bay by 100%

Dreads without change ( this ship class don't need nerf , as it is best balanced in the whole combat capital ship class)
Jump freighters/ Ronquals - they also should not be nerfed if current CCP goal is to boost nullsec industry - as biggest part of the profit will be burned out in fuel.

Black Ops - well , hard to say.

Please, lets just wait and see what happens after all the industry dust settles and then make adjustments.

This is such a bad change I don't even know where to begin.

how about you actually fix something for a change and dont mess with very few things i still like in the game...

CCP Fozzie, the biggest idiot in EVE Online, and that's pretty hard to do. Thanks for ruining small alliance logistics.

I do not see this as being a needed step in the right direction, it could alienate more players and isn't required.

If its intended to effect the larger fleet jumps fuel for fights then you need to tackle the Jump Bridging fuel requirements. Or have some fleet jump fuel dynamic if doing in large numbers.

This will hurt small and big alike the cost of fuel is already doubled in recent weeks.

So for example a JF fuel requirement depending on skills and ship type to further reaches of null from Jita is approximately in the range of 60-80k isotopes each way.

It cannot really be good to change this to 90/120k Iso's each way if prices stay the same or go up, that's at least 180m/240m round trip.

Or any equivalent smaller jumps for the same.

Carriers are less fuel costs than JF but then a 50% increase just for cargo of 10k m3 and 2 BS in ship maintenance array seems fubar, your not adjusting cargo sizes so why the fuel stick?

Surely additional fuel cost will simple be levied onwards to others fees, charges and contract costs and passed on to consumers.

Yes it will drive up desires to source cheaper Iso via icebelts but as others state these are not big enough for large fleet mining ops. It may hurt the smaller guys in increasing their costs.

To apply this across the board to all jump drives and a 50% increase in one go seems harsh.

Personally i just haven't seen a clammer from large or small players groups saying boy i wish the fuel needed was 50% higher that make the game s

Some changes announced are interesting and the verdict is out, i will watch to see the verdicts of others at Fanfest round tables to see.

I have an idea...

Dear ccp fozzie...I don't like you. you are a ***!

Its one thing that its increase the cost of force projection, moving caps, logistic. Its won't hurt bigger alliances.
The more important thing is, that this whole change this, and removing standing requirement to put up a tower in high sec will impact on topes prices. Simply its highly increase the demand for topes. If topes prices increasing thats increase the whole T2 prices.

Changing one little number can impact on the whole eve economy.