Player Features and Ideas Discussion

But then JFs and/or Rorquels would tag along with (sh*t tons of) extra fuel.




Yeah, an update would be nice. (Either from CCP or the CSM.)

I wont say that the price will go back down to what it was, but market speculation should NEVER have anything to do with balance changes. Since the neither the industry change or isotope consumption change have hit the live server yet its all speculations.

IF the industry changes means that there is less need for isotopes to run towers, there is a chance that the extra jump consumption takes the total consumption back to where it was. Some people over at CCP clearly belive this, and they are the ones with access to hard data regarding what is used where...

Bad. This is only going to hurt smaller corps and alliances.

All supercap fleets should see a 100 fold increase in jump costs, just for a start. (Lower JF and carrier requirements to counter this)
Wiping out the concept of PL dropping 12 supercaps on a ratting Drake would be reasonable.

Your point is a valid one.
But something has to be done to get rid of the vice lock the cartels have on null.
I personally like the idea of a small chance of ships not jumping, jumping to the wrong system, or flat out blowing up when jumps are done, with the percentage chance increasing as the mass and quantity of the ships involved increases, or if the target system is more congested.

But frankly, the only way to fix this mess is to remove supercaps from the game completely.

Hehe. I think it is a bit naive to presume that removing supercaps does anything to power projection. You would just get to complain about some power-block dropping 600 dreads or 800 carriers on you. Or if you remove capitals altogether then about 500 navy apocalypses or whatever happens to be the FOTM.

What might have some effect would be getting rid of alts (as practically all cynos and super-capitals are alts) - but lets be realistic. At this point it would be easier to write a new game without alts than get rid of alts in EVE. EVE has been a game where full game experience starts with 2 accounts for more than a decade by now.

Like most "power projection nerf's" it would mostly cripple smaller entities. Larger powerblocks would do their supercap cynos either from black ops or from carriers - depends on how, exactly, the proposal would be implemented. And inability to bridge battleships would be somewhat heavy handed - don't you think? I mean why stop there? For next thing we would have a problem that coalitions bridge battlecruisers, or T3's etc etc. And then you would have to nerf the carriers so that they cant carry a battleship. As otherwise (if carriers cant make supercap cynos which would be silly) they just give out the cyno BS from their hold to the waiting cyno alt.

Where there is a will there is a way and as long as supercaps themselves remain as they are you end up just chasing them around with all the special casings, cans and cant's. I mean why beat around the bush in such a indirect way? If super-capitals are a problem just do something about these ships.

Jump drives and bridge networks and titan bridges are just the tip of the iceberg as far as power projection goes. You can hammer at them all away until they are all gone and unused and you would still have power projection. Even today I can be anywhere in EVE in 2 minutes or a bit less if I find a friendly triggerhappy local nearby only limit is where my corporation has offices. With a little planning any major coalition can have suitable stashes of doctrine ships in predefined locations with unlimited mobility, for all practical purposes, without lighting a single cyno. Nerf medical clones enough if that becomes a problem and you sort of kill off high SP PvP viability and delegate fleet PvP to specific tailor made alts. Again putting smaller more disorganized entities at severe disadvantage against older, alt heavier, better funded entities.

Only way I see how you can sort of "nerf" to some degree major coalitions / rental empires is something akin to NPC null/ low sec. You have to push back every day to keep your spot in the wrold. The second you stop the reds flood in into the local. I.e., you have to actually live in the space you hold to hold it. But I have no glue how one would go around achieving it in a fair and balanced way that leads into menaingful and fun sov system which does not get your local "small entity" violated whenever the adjacent larger entity wills is to be so.

That aside - the fuel consumption changes are not aimed at power projection directly. Their aim was to re-balance perceived drop in ice consumption as a result of new industry system causing unanchoring of huge amounts of towers in empire (presumably).

Can't wait for this change.

Isn't this going to be unreasonably tough on the individual pilots? I live in a wormhole and sometimes i move my dread between wormhole systems via low/null sec... It sounds like i'm going to have do a lot of messing around hauling fuel to my jump points.

If fuel usage is being doubled, them why is the fuel bay capacity only being increased by a third?

my mistake, i thought it was 100% for some reason...