These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Inferno And Datacores

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#161 - 2012-05-03 13:25:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Indahmawar Fazmarai
Malcanis wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
(...)

Mining with guns was bad because it detracted from real mining. This is bad because it detracts from......what exactly?

We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec. This gives us a very cool venue for FW to influence the rest of the universe instead of being a closed-loop system.


Shocked

And just when you thought CCP couldn't out-fuk themselves, they manage to successfully shatter a new boundary of stupidity.



What's wrong with moving T2 production to 0.0?


Wrong? It's just CCP standard procedure, whiny minority A bitches, so let's all devs figure a way to steal gameplay from hisec and spoon feed it to whiny minority A. I mean, actually adding content for those whiny minorities without fuking hisecccers in the process would be so un-EVE-ish, wouldn't it?

And certainly nothing could go wrong with stealing gameplay from the huge hisec majority to feed the little whiny minorities, as no one who has ever had their liver taken out by us has survived...
jack morrigan
red vine industrial services
#162 - 2012-05-03 13:30:11 UTC
dear CCP this datacore chamge along with the removal of drone salvage is just the latest attack on indipendent hi/sec t2 industry , if the purpose of these attacks is to force us into lagre alliance's you lose i'm don't pay my subscription just to be controled by someone i have a boss in R/L , i'll just find another game to play
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#163 - 2012-05-03 13:34:21 UTC
jack morrigan wrote:
dear CCP this datacore chamge along with the removal of drone salvage is just the latest attack on indipendent hi/sec t2 industry , if the purpose of these attacks is to force us into lagre alliance's you lose i'm don't pay my subscription just to be controled by someone i have a boss in R/L , i'll just find another game to play



Did you know that there are areas of 0.0 that aren't controlled by "lagre" alliances?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#164 - 2012-05-03 13:36:47 UTC
Killer Gandry wrote:
Vince Snetterton wrote:

LOL..who do you think GAVE him the idea.
Once null sec zealots realized how powerful a meta-game tool the CSM was, it was all over for high sec.


Not as powerfull as having a lead designer in your alliance.


as I said elsewhere:

Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Fannie Maes wrote:
BoB all over again, when will CCP ever learn? If they have one source of income you would assume you take great lengths to protect it, afterlast year, dust and wod and now this goons stuff... no wonder Iceland are doing so great!


Seriously, if CCP wants to play the game tey need to give it to someone else to make as theve proven time and time again they cant be trusted to seperate in game and business

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#165 - 2012-05-03 13:38:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
(...)

Mining with guns was bad because it detracted from real mining. This is bad because it detracts from......what exactly?

We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec. This gives us a very cool venue for FW to influence the rest of the universe instead of being a closed-loop system.


Shocked

And just when you thought CCP couldn't out-fuk themselves, they manage to successfully shatter a new boundary of stupidity.


Theyve BEEN saying this since the qq no ice in high sec drama when we saw that idea board

however, wheres the coolness in turning EVE from a sandbox into a linear game?
Sandbox, you can try to do anything anywhere
Linear, highsec is the introduction area, 0.0 is end game.

Quote:
This is not gonna make the FW crowd happy and it's certainly not making us R&D people happy either, so I wonder who you're doing this for?

The people that enjoy killing the ppl that like making T2 stuff till they no longer WANT to make said stuff.

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#166 - 2012-05-03 13:44:51 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
(...)

Mining with guns was bad because it detracted from real mining. This is bad because it detracts from......what exactly?

We want to move T2 production more towards low and zero-sec. This gives us a very cool venue for FW to influence the rest of the universe instead of being a closed-loop system.


Shocked

And just when you thought CCP couldn't out-fuk themselves, they manage to successfully shatter a new boundary of stupidity.


Theyve BEEN saying this since the qq no ice in high sec drama when we saw that idea board

however, wheres the coolness in turning EVE from a sandbox into a linear game?
Sandbox, you can try to do anything anywhere
Linear, highsec is the introduction area, 0.0 is end game.

Quote:
This is not gonna make the FW crowd happy and it's certainly not making us R&D people happy either, so I wonder who you're doing this for?

The people that enjoy killing the ppl that like making T2 stuff till they no longer WANT to make said stuff.



As a compromise, how would you feel if conditions for hi-seccers trying to do industry and invention were merely made the same as in 0.0?

I presume a level playing field would be optimum for promoting "the sandbox" in your eyes?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#167 - 2012-05-03 13:45:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Killer Gandry wrote:
Malcanis wrote:


What's wrong with moving T2 production to 0.0?


My suggestion would be to also introduce much higher jumpbridge costs and much smaller jumprange for capitals.

This should make EVE a tad bigger again and bring some "risk" to hauling all those datacores to null sec then.
We can't have any riskfree Isk, you know.


Dont they all ready?
Tech Moons and all that. Looks like just High Sec isnt allowed those

Malcanis wrote:



As a compromise, how would you feel if conditions for hi-seccers trying to do industry and invention were merely made the same as in 0.0?

I presume a level playing field would be optimum for promoting "the sandbox" in your eyes?


why not do as the other guy said then and make everything 0.0? If youre gonna make it so that 0.0 is end game go whole hog on it dont half ass it

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#168 - 2012-05-03 13:50:35 UTC
Aron Croup wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
So it sounds like what you're saying is that hi-sec is entitled to have the overwhelming advantage for all forms of construction? And that making anything preferrable to build in 0.0 is breaking the "sandbox", but gimping 0.0 for building everything isn't?


A BPO or BPC requires the same materials and time to produce an item in high-sec as it does in null. The advantages of producing in high-sec comes from proximity to resources and proximity to the people who buy your product. If you move the resources out of high-sec (i.e. datacores and high-end minerals) that is not going to change the fact that people will still build things primarily in empire, close to the rest of the resources they need and close to the buyers.

Also, don't complain that high-sec is convenient. That's how it's supposed to work. Empire space is the center of New Eden, where billions of people live out their lives, so naturally that's where the commerce would be.

Null-sec, on the other hand, is a frontier, remote and lawless, and in the old days with vast distances between settled systems.

So unless you want to offer the builders of EVE some cheap labor in null-sec that we can outsource our workload to, I don't think it makes much sense to move T2 production.


Agreed

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#169 - 2012-05-03 13:50:56 UTC
Can't you answer the question? Surely if tilting one part of industrial activity towards 0.0 is "breaking the sandbox" then tilting all parts of industrial activity to hi-sec is breaking it, scattering the sand and replacing it with broken glass and rusty razor wire?

How is giving hi-sec every possible advantage in industrial activity "sandboxy"?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#170 - 2012-05-03 13:51:47 UTC
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....so presumably folks doing FW will buy them with their LP/ISK and then put them on the market, so us bottom feeder Tech 2 producers can still operate. Will these guys even have to have the prerequisite skills to get them?

Right now what I've been doing is using the datacores I aquire through my standings and skills to research blueprints, so I can go on to manufacture the goods. I assume in this new scheme I can buy the datacores at a vastly inflated price from the market to continue to do this? Margins are kinda squeeky close on some of the stuff you can manufacture as it is, so I assume this will essentially crush the ability to make any money doing tech 2 production UNLESS you are participating in FW?

Is there any wiggle room in this new paradigm? Can I still make a profit on tech 2 without doing FW somehow?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#171 - 2012-05-03 13:55:59 UTC
Ana Vyr wrote:
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....so presumably folks doing FW will buy them with their LP/ISK and then put them on the market, so us bottom feeder Tech 2 producers can still operate. Will these guys even have to have the prerequisite skills to get them?

Right now what I've been doing is using the datacores I aquire through my standings and skills to research blueprints, so I can go on to manufacture the goods. I assume in this new scheme I can buy the datacores at a vastly inflated price from the market to continue to do this? Margins are kinda squeeky close on some of the stuff you can manufacture as it is, so I assume this will essentially crush the ability to make any money doing tech 2 production UNLESS you are participating in FW?

Is there any wiggle room in this new paradigm? Can I still make a profit on tech 2 without doing FW somehow?




You realise that you can drop in and out of the NPC FW corps at will, right?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#172 - 2012-05-03 13:57:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Antisocial Malkavian
Malcanis wrote:
Can't you answer the question? Surely if tilting one part of industrial activity towards 0.0 is "breaking the sandbox" then tilting all parts of industrial activity to hi-sec is breaking it, scattering the sand and replacing it with broken glass and rusty razor wire?

How is giving hi-sec every possible advantage in industrial activity "sandboxy"?


Im not good at arguing is why. Please note the difference between me being **** at debate and me not being able to defend my position because youre right - cause youre not. Im just one of those ppl ppl like you LOVE to debate with because I do it in fact so poorly that ppl like yuo will tromp all over me every time and stroke your ego lol

So I perfer to agree with ppl in quotes and let someone who can argue come into the thread while you shriek in impotent rage.

GL with that

Mara Rinn wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
I think you're neglecting the huge effective subsidies that hi-sec manufacturing recieves compared to 0.0


The greatest subsidy that hisec gets to manufacturing is the number of people in hisec allowed to do manufacturing. As a result, there is always a supply of near- or below-cost material for you to work with for T1 manufacture. Noone has to worry where their next load of Tritanium is going to come from.

In nullsec, mining is an express pass on the ridicule bus. If you're not shot by blues, you'll be labelled a bot if not kicked from corp. People who manage to maintain an industrial lifestyle in null sec are the exception, not the rule. Even in supposedly "industry friendly" corporations, you are still expected to be able to fly approved fleet fits in mandatory fleet fights.

The funniest joke in the game is the null sec alliances complaining that it's hard to get serious industrialists out to null sec, then in the same breath they laugh about the industrial corp they tricked into flying billions of ISK worth of ships and bootstrapping resources through EC-P8R. This talk of "farms and fields" from The Mittani is the greatest joke of all: he's not interested in farms and fields as activities to occupy his industrialists with: he just wants more stuff (for his minions) to blow up.

Malcanis is neglecting the huge effective disincentives to null sec manufacturing which have absolutely nothing to do with game mechanics, very little to do with carrot, and a hell of a lot to do with stick.


that too

Killer Gandry wrote:
Null sec just want's it easier to dominate the game.

Goons just want it easier to ruin your game.

CCP just want's to cater to them more because they succesfully took metagaming to a new level.

New players and old vets alike who want to spend most or all of their time in hi sec for whatever reason have their place at the bottom of the foodchain.

The sandbox is dead and the linear game is born. CCP threw the baby out with the bathwater when they started to set directions and "endgame goals" in the game and fabricate directions towards a certain playstyle and section in the game.
Favouritism prevails and the beginning of the end takes yet another step.


as well

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Antisocial Malkavian
Antisocial Malkavians
#173 - 2012-05-03 13:58:59 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
jack morrigan wrote:
dear CCP this datacore chamge along with the removal of drone salvage is just the latest attack on indipendent hi/sec t2 industry , if the purpose of these attacks is to force us into lagre alliance's you lose i'm don't pay my subscription just to be controled by someone i have a boss in R/L , i'll just find another game to play



Did you know that there are areas of 0.0 that aren't controlled by "lagre" alliances?


Did you know theyre so because theyre worthless?

And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#174 - 2012-05-03 14:00:02 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Can't you answer the question? Surely if tilting one part of industrial activity towards 0.0 is "breaking the sandbox" then tilting all parts of industrial activity to hi-sec is breaking it, scattering the sand and replacing it with broken glass and rusty razor wire?

How is giving hi-sec every possible advantage in industrial activity "sandboxy"?


Im not good at arguing is why. Please note the difference between me being **** at debate and me not being able to defend my position because youre right - cause youre not. Im just one of those ppl ppl like you LOVE to debate with because I do it in fact so poorly that ppl like yuo will tromp all over me every time and stroke your ego lol

So I perfer to agree with ppl in quotes and let someone who can argue come into the thread while you shriek in impotent rage.

GL with that


Well it seems like you're the one "shrieking with impotent rage" and I'm trying to understand why. If you can't give a coherent reason as to why you're right, and I can, then you might want to consider the possibility that it's because I'm right and you're not.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Francisco Bizzaro
#175 - 2012-05-03 14:05:48 UTC
Ana Vyr wrote:
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....

Really? But there was a guy earlier in this thread who said:

CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're not removing research agents or the ability to farm datacores from them. What we're going to do is slow down the rate of datacores you accumulate and put a small pricetag on them.

Additionally to that, they're being added to the Faction Warfare LP store, with a dynamic price.

We should have a devblog out later this month with the exact details.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#176 - 2012-05-03 14:15:49 UTC
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
jack morrigan wrote:
dear CCP this datacore chamge along with the removal of drone salvage is just the latest attack on indipendent hi/sec t2 industry , if the purpose of these attacks is to force us into lagre alliance's you lose i'm don't pay my subscription just to be controled by someone i have a boss in R/L , i'll just find another game to play



Did you know that there are areas of 0.0 that aren't controlled by "lagre" alliances?


Did you know theyre so because theyre worthless?



No, that actually comes as something of a surprise to me. Now I feel a bit let down about the 9 Dramiel and 2 Cynabal BPCs I got on Tuesday evening, plus the 91 Gallente Fleet Col. I tags (almost enough for 2 CN BCU BPCs)

1.2 billion ISK doesn't go as far as it used to I guess. I'll try harder tonight to make up for the worthlessness of the space I'm forced to inhabit.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#177 - 2012-05-03 14:22:36 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Ana Vyr wrote:
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....so presumably folks doing FW will buy them with their LP/ISK and then put them on the market, so us bottom feeder Tech 2 producers can still operate. Will these guys even have to have the prerequisite skills to get them?

Right now what I've been doing is using the datacores I aquire through my standings and skills to research blueprints, so I can go on to manufacture the goods. I assume in this new scheme I can buy the datacores at a vastly inflated price from the market to continue to do this? Margins are kinda squeeky close on some of the stuff you can manufacture as it is, so I assume this will essentially crush the ability to make any money doing tech 2 production UNLESS you are participating in FW?

Is there any wiggle room in this new paradigm? Can I still make a profit on tech 2 without doing FW somehow?




You realise that you can drop in and out of the NPC FW corps at will, right?



Yep, but why would I? I have no interest at all in FW. Forcing me to participate won't work because I'm not going to spend liesure time doing something I don't want to do, even if that something enables something else. I have really limited game time, sadly, due to life. I love EvE though, so I still play in a limited capacity...ie tech 2 production/market/mining.
Ana Vyr
Vyral Technologies
#178 - 2012-05-03 14:24:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Ana Vyr
Francisco Bizzaro wrote:
Ana Vyr wrote:
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....

Really? But there was a guy earlier in this thread who said:

CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're not removing research agents or the ability to farm datacores from them. What we're going to do is slow down the rate of datacores you accumulate and put a small pricetag on them.

Additionally to that, they're being added to the Faction Warfare LP store, with a dynamic price.

We should have a devblog out later this month with the exact details.




Fair enough, as long as the "small pricetag" doesn't crush the margins to the point of non-viability.
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#179 - 2012-05-03 14:54:27 UTC
Ana Vyr wrote:
So, it sounds like we won't be able to aquire datacores without FW LP....

Completely incorrect.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1229956#post1229956

CCP Soundwave wrote:
We're not removing research agents or the ability to farm datacores from them. What we're going to do is slow down the rate of datacores you accumulate and put a small pricetag on them.

Additionally to that, they're being added to the Faction Warfare LP store, with a dynamic price.

We should have a devblog out later this month with the exact details.



Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#180 - 2012-05-03 15:11:27 UTC
My industry characters, like most who focus their characters, fly indys, transports, freighters and JFs. It takes near 10m SP in ship skills and another 10m SP in science, not to mention all the building and efficiency skills, to build a good inventor/builder.

You spend months and months grinding standing via courier missions to unlock level 4 research.

Then CCP comes along and says, " Sorry you wasted all that time and training., but you need to shoot stuff for datacores now and become a war target while you do it."

Cool. So now I get to jump into lowsec through the most heavily camped gates in the game in my mighty Iteron and fight wars so that I can get some datacores that fail nine times out of ten in invention runs.

Time to start stockpiling T2 people. If this goes through you will be rich since T2 will become more rare than faction stuff.

Mr Epeen Cool