EVE General Discussion

all the posts threatening to 10 box vnis and make even more isk are hard to take credibly as they could have always done that.


Probably not indeed. would be foolish to completely get rid of it, need to have some sort of mechanic to say who owns the space. Might be worth rethinking what benefits come with sov, and how the system determines who has sov. but that's a hard problem.

Do this. go to an upgraded system, and have some kind of timer. spend an hour doing anoms the regualr way. see how much you make.

The next hour, use your timer and wait 30 seconds longer after finishing a site before warping to the next. See what you make after than hour. I know how this work because I did it once to prove that warp times affect income when it comes to anomalies. It's more than noticeable.

And that doesn't include the times you might get hung up on a gate... Don't trust my word, try it for yourself, I'm not making anything up.




Nothing is going to take them out of pvp, they have uses a 10% DPS nerf isn't going to end. but forcing them out of anoms kills some of the best hunter content the game has. And making it to where nothing can cyno into an anom? You just created sub cap safe spots that would be abused to no end.



Ratting is balanced by danger. Subcaps don't need a ratting nerf, nor do they need a ratting buff. It is carriers and supers than need fixing. look at the bounty figures I copy/pasted from CCP Larrikin's announcement.



Because "just doing one" would screw up other things, while doing what CCP is doing has the least impact on both pvp and the economy.

The pvp nerf is incidental and regrettable, but capital pvp in sov only affects a few people relatively speaking (lots of people play EVE without partaking in sov warfare), the economy affects every single EVE player and is more important.

Nobody is arguing the economic need to remove the insane ticks from carriers in anoms. The only discussion is the solution.

CCP's solution is to nerf the carrier as a class of ship in all areas of the game.

I'm saying the nerf should only happen where the problem is... in anomalies.

I can concede that what ideas I float may be flawed. My thinking about this issue has involved all of a few hours of thought. But I can't understand why anyone would favor a blanket nerf when nobody thinks carriers are overpowerd in PvP... only in ratting.

Look... divide bounties for anyone in a carrier/supercarrier by 2 (or 3, or for or whatever is appropriate). This has the same impact in their ability to make isk... but leaves their viability in PvP. We are already doing a bounty calculation ont he server every time you kill a rat. It already does mathematical operations (divide by the number of ships in your fleet on grid). So... add one that divides the bounty at that time based on shiptype.

The problem is in the way the economy is impacted. We all agree on that. Make the solution isk based rather than damage based. You solve the problem without screwing with the ship's use in PvP.

If the red gets blown up really isn't material to my safety if I'm ratting. I guess the point is that if I'm running at the first sign of trouble... I'm safe regardless of the gate. The closest I've ever been is when my drones were 50km away and I waited to recall them... and even then I was entering warp just as the red was landing on grid. My losses in anoms were when I thought I could go AFK for a couple of minutes and came back to find myself tackled (or dead). That result wouldn't have changed with a gate.

I don't really think the ability to trap and kill the red factors into the discussion of safety. That's content... and it's not about who wins the content that's as important as if the content occurs. If gates created more ganks of hunters... that would be a positive factor in the discussion... because the fight happened. Doesn't really matter who wins.

But again, I'm not hung up on gates as the answer. I just think that if the OP-ness of carriers is SOLELY due to their anom ratting potential... the nerf should be limited to that as well. Divide carrier bounties by 3. Don't let them in. Whatever the answer is it doesn't make sense to implement a blanket nerf that kills their usefullness in an area where they are not OP to answer an issue in an area where they are.

Annnd Force Auxillaries were created in what 2015? Welcone back returning player. A lot has changed. Drakes are no longer good.

Easy way to nerf bounties is simply overfarming mechanics. As NPCs get killed fewer spawn over time because well... youre killing them and so they go elsewhere to do their dirty work, while other areas of the system, such as asteroids, relic/datas or signatures increase to make up for the relative system value forcing you out of your niche over time into other activities or forcing you to move systems.

Any dynamic system would help alleviate such issues in the future yet if you keep the relative isk/system/hour roughly the same it would work for specific overfarming for any one single weapon/activity type.

You could potentially even drop sec status in certain systems while raising them within the constellations other systems over time. Given a dynamic constellation sec status overfarmed systems become worse and worse as time goes on for only one activity profile but just as profitable for a general or total isk/hr profile given all the various activities within Eve while the other underfarmed/underused systems see a sec increase and therefore an isk/hr increase. So simply ratting means that ratting would become functionally highly unprofitable while other areas would gain huge over time. This means flavor of the month ships, weapons and activities would be nerfed by simple overusage and be a players own fault if their bounties or "mah isk/hour!!" gets 'nerfed' by their own activities.

Just my two cents, but Im busy getting drunk, enjoy your thread.

Some pretty big wall of texts in here lol

-Any entosis link activated by a player not in the defending alliance is counted as attacking. This means that an alliance can not enlist other entities to defend their structures with entosis links.- from the wiki, still current afaik.
That last line though, 'what are you paying the sov holder for?', oh my.
The mechanic favours dogpiling.

Disclaimer for thread: i trained into archon just in time for the first carrier changes, held off on purchase, got into a mino and chimera for pvp just days before these changes. I don't even want to lawnmower rats for spaec shekels, way to jerk me around ccp.
Still not unsubbing tho, maybe they can get this right.

And if you read the actual thread you would see that it would also be very bad. Because the issue is not everyones bounty income, the issue is a very specific set of ships bounty income, and the solution you are advocating for nerfs everyone.

Also CCP did have issues about carriers volleying subcaps instantly when in groups in PvP as well. Not purely PvE issues, though obviously a far lesser issue.

I think the "^^" in Blade's text was pointing at my post Nevyn and in that case I think you are incorrect simply because the isk/hr per system stays the same unless you only sit there and use the system for one thing or let other unused content build up unrun. What it does means is that you need to either get other people into your corp/alliance or system that will run that content or you can get into the appropriate ship and run it yourself and then get back to your normal activities. But overall what it would do is force people to stop running in only one system and moving around a bit to farm the better content in other systems in the constellation.

So less renting one system and staying there. Less option to sit only in a few of the better sec systems way off in the back somewhere and forcing more usage of the entire constellation which means more chance of interaction with other players on gates, from more whs spawning and would mean less bubbles everywhere constantly as players would be forced to move around more often and less bubbles to ease travel times, especially for carriers and capitals, would mean more vulnerabilities to enemy fleets roaming around as well.

It would also mean that you would have to have infrastructure built up within the entire constellation or at least a few different systems as safety, security and staging points. So having defensive ships only in one staging system and reshipping would be harder or require people to put more into other citadels and thereby putting more at risk and into play. Still a sad thing they wont go boom more often though.

Now who this WOULD be bad for is the people who only want to do one thing in game. Im reminded of the CODE telling players that only sit and mine in high sec all the time and dont do anything else to HTFU and play the better, broader game here. You dont want to be like one of the high sec miner types do you?