These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-08-03 20:53
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-11 19:29
  • Likes Received: 23

Hitego Luna

Security Status 5.0
  • POCKET-ACES Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • EVE_Online_Installer_673186 non-working for new users in EVE Technology and Research Center

    EVE_Online_Installer_673186 does not install the launcher as part of the install process. This is a repeatable problem (when trying to install twice in two different directories). The consequence of this is eve does not launch from the desktop icon; also enabling the option "launch eve online" at the end of the installer does not start eve.

    The workaround is to run the repair tool from the install directory, which will hash the directory and eventually download a "patch" that will install the launcher.

    CCP, please fix this so new players can get into the game with a minimum amount of fuss. The workaround is probably not what most new users will do upon downloading the software for the first time.

  • CA-1 and CA-2 implants in EVE Gameplay Center

    Investing in the Genolution CA-2 was a genuine gamble. However devaluing the Genolution CA-1 in the market was a horrible move.

    The CA-1 is meant to be very rare as described in its item description:
    "... Genolution went one step further to assuage fears however and vowed never to release the implant to open markets, providing only a single-run issue to capsuleers as a demonstration of the technology."

    This is a disappointing move by CCP, and creates a trend in which any item, from tournament prize ships to Zephyrs, can be created at will and be re-distributed in volume.

    To address any reply that states that we should treat this as "just a game", or to have us "deal with it" because it is CCP's world, or "it's just in the item description": the success of this game relies on a feeling of value of one's accomplishments and investment. I was heavily invested in CA-1 implants. This type of betrayal in one's investment in the game makes suspension of disbelief impossible, and reveals that EVE is just a way to keep people sitting at a computer pushing buttons and doing something meaningless so someone in Iceland can eat dinner.

  • EVE Community Spotlight #10 - SOMER blink in EVE Information Center

    From the Devblog:

    "According to Somerset, some of the lottery earnings are used to reward the staff for their great work, but quite a bit is also used to support the EVE Community. It speaks to itself that this support is usually done in the background and without big trumpet sounds, but we would like to mention here at least a recent donation to New Eden Open tournament teams."

    Given blink is a self-sustaining enterprise, it is safe to say that in this context "quite a bit" is actually smaller than "some". However Somerset is trying to equivocate by using the word "some" instead of "most", and the repetition in the printed article is deplorable.

    I think the second sentence in this paragraph is completely misleading. There is no value being given out to the community the vast majority of the time from blink. Assuming the existence of "unreported" support is not supported by any sort of inductive reasoning. This "unreported" support might as well be payments to alts on blink affiliated accounts.

    All players will lose ISK playing blink in the long run, the convergence of the game is to a negative income for players. Any winners are beneficiaries of short term variance and even they will lose in the long run.

  • NON warp-capable Ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I like this idea very much, especially having NWC ships in a multiple-player-piloted carrier. There would have to be some sort of activity inside the MPPC to keep all pilots busy while they are traveling to a new system. Maybe an in-game poker table where avatars can sit down for a "live" poker game with "tells"?

  • Dont change the 2/10 plexes! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP should NOT move DED 1 and 2 sites to the exploration system. There are not enough "sight seeing" land marks to draw people into lowsec and nullsec as-is. Why remove a motivator to get players to enter PVP zones?

    Sure this makes flying new buffed scan frigates relatively more valuable, but you are then degrading the fun factor of ALL frigates that noobs, and even year old or older pilots like myself fly to these zones.

    This game is lacking in small but meaningful pvp encounters. Lots of players enjoy these spots given that they are accessible in any frigate for small risk, pvp, as well as the chance for a small reward. If the motivation is to prevent farming: the key here is the material reward is small, but since it is often a random deadspace item it feels unique.

    There are FAR larger sources of bounties and items that provide FAR less interesting interaction than the on-map DED locations.

  • Forum "Agree" button in EVE Technology and Research Center

    In the past, complex rating systems on youtube and other sites have been transformed into simple ratings systems (star rating has become like and dislike on youtube).

    Indeed, the semantic difference between like and agree may be important to some people. However, a lot of EVE's player base can see the rating system for what it is,and not take your rating as like=love.

    "Like" just has become the jargon for approval or the equivalent of a mathematical +1 in a scoring system. I actually prefer the missing "dislike" button. While perpetually gaming the like button via alts is possible, adding a dislike button will not even cancel out a fraudulent number of positive ratings unless fraudulent methods of providing negative ratings is also used.

  • Weekend One Contest: Predict the Winner for Razer Gaming Peripherals in EVE Communication Center

    8 CAS

  • Holy shit, Somer Blink owns. <3 in EVE Communication Center

    Ancyker wrote:

    That aside, I've put about 2.5b into blink ... [truncated]


    Yes this will make the Open tournament more interesting and better for the teams involved, however Somer Blink has considered the profit possible to be made off of the eve player base by having their name in the login screen news on a regular basis, and it far exceeds any "donation" that they have made to the community.

    Any profit you have made off of Blink is because you are lucky. I have made a lot of money off of people like you at poker. Please keep on playing like you do.

  • Holy shit, Somer Blink owns. <3 in EVE Communication Center

    I can see how some developers are excited at the prospect of all Open teams having more ISK to put on a better show when the tournament begins. Also, the entry of EVE into e-sports is an great step to attract and introduce more users into EVE Online.

    However, everyone should remember that every ticket in regular lotteries n Somer Blink has less expected value than what it costs to buy the ticket. Promotions put on by Blink only give back a fraction of the massive profits they make.

    Put another way, every player that plays Blink is a loser in the long run.

    I'm not sure how encouraging the taking of ISK from a huge number of players, a lot of whom do not know any better, and creating wealth for a single entity is conducive to the health of the player base in EVE Online.

  • Formation based boosting in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The bonuses would move at the speed of the slowest ship in the formation. Formation boosts would not have to be the only bonuses applied (this is not to replace existing boosting entirely).

    Since small gang warfare involves a lot of orbiting, formation bonuses would probably apply only to command ships and larger (BS, Capital ships) with specific formations including say, logistics, in a rearward position with bonuses to range if they stay in formation. Balancing a huge number of possible formations would take time, and would require community input as to what formations should receive what boosts. But given the simple nature to implement additional formations once the base code is written to allow any formation, storage and selection from many different community-created possible formations would not be difficult.

    In order to keep the general idea for the initial implementation of formation boosts simple, the notion of "cover" provided by other ships was left out. But cover is a very interesting aspect that can be provided by larger ships in a different feature addition that would enhance the effect of formations.

    Concavity and placement of DPS in order to concentrate fire is important in a large number of strategy games where targeting cannot be blocked by forward enemy units, such as some famous 2D RTS games (forward enemy zealots do not provide cover for the dragoons in the back).

  • Formation based boosting in EVE Technology and Research Center

    With recent talk about overhauling boosters, I think now is a prudent time to discuss this possibility. Currently engagement in two small gangs is about having "Ball of ships A" warp on to grid and battle "Ball of Ships B".

    What does not happen is having an offensive formation advance upon a defensive formation. This is the kind of excitement that can be seen in the Inferno trailer

    Warping ships would still have the ships arrive on grid in a ball, however in order to get any boosts the ships must get into formation. The formation boost can be enforced by requiring key ships in the formation to follow graphical formation indicators, probably a translucent sphere within which their specific ship is supposed to stay in order to stay in formation.

    Formation stat boosts would be increased for your formation peers if you stay in formation, and boosts for the individual player would be lost if they fall out of formation. Formations in general may be given the requirement of forward motion or static placement in order to maintain boosts.

    Boosts would not apply to all ships, such as frigates, which would instead weave within the existing formation of battleships and capital ships. in order to create the "battles within battles" style of game play given the wide variety in ships in this game.

    In addition to stat boosts, natural spacing and concavity of the formations would produce strength in some zones and weakness in others. These natural positional advantages (interlocking fire, defensive placement of vulnerable ships) and disadvantages (flanks, exposed forward fleet section) would vary between a number of selectable formations for fleet commanders.

    In conclusion, including formation boosts would facilitate the creation of a textured battlefield, which must be navigated by pilots of ships of all sizes at sub warp-speed over finite distances in order to have a successful battle.

  • crashing when I enter the game. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I've started having this issue:
    1) launch eve
    2) login with correct username/pass
    3) see character select screen and select the arrow that makes you enter the game
    4) see progress bar that says "entering game as character"
    5) progress bar remains, but progress bar is now at beginning and the word "failed" appears below the progress bar
    (internet connectivity is fine, tried clearing cache files: problem is still present)

    Previously all day today I had symptoms of something odd with connection dropping every 15-60 minutes (other internet games and web on my computer remained working), logging in was no problem earlier today.

    I haven't seen anything that says a full reinstall won't fix this, but I have not reinstalled. That's a good couple hours for me on the speed of my connection.

  • [ISK6] ♥ ♦ Eve Online Hold'Em ♣ ♠ -- EVE's Oldest Gaming Establishment in EVE Gameplay Center

    Poker is a great way to sit back and relax and if you get lucky you win some ISK. Thanks to Eve Online Hold'em!