These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A Nerf to Datacores....The CCP mistake

Author
Haulie Berry
#41 - 2012-05-17 22:17:17 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:
Volar Kang wrote:
clixor wrote:
[quote=Tadeo Musashy]

So my advice to players who trained the skills, either go actually use the science skills and go invent. Or sell the char.



How can I invent when I just lost half my cores and who wants to buy a char with useless skills? I'm not saying the datacore change is the gamebreaker here but when you add it to the coming change of T2 production in low/null sec only, many of the small invention corps just took a hit to the chin.


I'm concerned for this too. I'm not one of those nerds training dozens of alts for this purpose therefore I have my alt industrial toon only that does this.
It's a hell of a hit on it's chin because was not doing real benefits for the time invested on hauling the dam things/sell or invent, but was something to experiment and try out.

Now with these changes will just become totally useless and wasted SP since I'll be better killing rabbits (rats) for instant gratification and eventually buy some from all those nerds keeping dozens alts doing that, since because of their actions prices will not be that higher after a few speculation moments.

Still, spend time training for useless skills when same amount of skills in guns would probably be a better investment.


...or you could just use those skills to make way more money on invention than you ever did from datacores.
Haulie Berry
#42 - 2012-05-17 22:19:03 UTC
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
Haulie Berry wrote:
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
i'd bet that all those who favour the datacore nerf have never bothered to train a shtload of skills to lvl 5 for the only reason of having 300 RP/day... thay also never bothered to raise the standings with a corp and with an agent for the only reason of having 300 RP/day... in fact they are backing up this nerf mostly because they have no access to those "free" datacores so lets screw those who have access... let me remind them: those are not "free" datacores... maybe static but not "free"... we are talking about some good months of training time and gameplay in order to have that benefit... for example: what would a pvp'er think if suddently ccp would decide to nerf the "xxx gun specialization" skills so that the skill would not "grant" a 2% dmg increase per level but only 1%? i'm sure most if not all of them would scream out loud and clear that they "invested" training time and they dont deserve to be nerfed...
if "static" is consdered to be bad then find other means to enforce activity - but datacores gain should stay with R&D agents where it was and all those eager to get their hands on some "free" datacores should do the same effort to have them handy...



Confirming that you are, in fact, the first player to ever have been adversely affected by a change in game mechanics.

Seriously, I don't agree at all that datacores should be tied to FW. It simply doesn't make sense that the faction militias would be the primary purveyors of engineering knowledge in the universe.

That said, the existing mechanic is pretty poor, too. Anything that encourages using an army of alts to passively farm items is clearly silly.

As for the shitload of skills to 5: They're almost entirely the same skills used in invention, so they haven't been rendered useless. Don't be so melodramatic.


in fact , since 2003 we've been screwed... errr... "adversely affected " several (dozens) times by all kind of changes in game mechanics - and i'm still here so at the end of the day i was able to survive GAME changes... the main issue i'm pointing on is some (including this datacores one) changes are rather radical screwes then lucrative tweaks, affecting way too much training-time-wise... when i've decided to folow the scientist path, investing several good months into the process the perspective was clear... therfore any changes to the "outcome" should be either a resonable (and/or justified) tweak - for example: one should "validate" his daily datacores harvest by visiting the agent every day... or, even better, if radical changes ar to be made, one should at least have the opportunity to reallocate, at will, all the skillpoints in the changed area, coresponding to the new "improved" game reality...

and no: i'm not melodramatic, i'm angry: almost as angry as i was when exploration was screwed... when another several good months of speced training time suddently ment sht and i was supposed to run side by side with every 2 months old chars who decided that spawning probes is "fun"... grrrr...


I trained scanning skills before the change too, and, you know what?

The scanning change was probably one of the single biggest gameplay improvements to date. They took a system that was an obnoxious novelty and turned it into a real profession.
zoni Ishikela
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2012-05-17 22:38:29 UTC
I suggest this is only an evolution of the game and not a nerf. I was taken aback initially because I was thinking that this was hitting me (again) just as I finally got agent standings to start this stuff (that took 6 months). Now I guess I also have to train my toons for faction warfare which will only make things more interesting and *gasp* require more cross-training. I'm sure when I get there, that too will change. Oh well, that's how it works but it is strangely masochistically narcotic and I can't imagine wanting to do anything in Eve that doesn't take arm, foot and oh, yes, more training.

To use the cliche, the only constant is change.

The cost and procurement method of datacores is only going to shift too, as we, good corporate warriors, will will simply pass on the cost to our beloved customers, so I 'm not really worried about that. In fact, that's what the theory of open market and why Eve is so good.

Datacores, like botting and ganking, shouldn't be that easy to farm and should require a minimal amount of effort.

Then again, I suspect that game designers will primarily focus on the parts of Eve that are abused, and if anything, I know I abuse them and trained a long time to be able to abuse them, just because I could. A touch up to the mechanics isn't a bad thing.

Z.

Tadeo Musashy
Doomheim
#44 - 2012-05-17 22:51:43 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
Haulie Berry wrote:
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
i'd bet that all those who favour the datacore nerf have never bothered to train a shtload of skills to lvl 5 for the only reason of having 300 RP/day... thay also never bothered to raise the standings with a corp and with an agent for the only reason of having 300 RP/day... in fact they are backing up this nerf mostly because they have no access to those "free" datacores so lets screw those who have access... let me remind them: those are not "free" datacores... maybe static but not "free"... we are talking about some good months of training time and gameplay in order to have that benefit... for example: what would a pvp'er think if suddently ccp would decide to nerf the "xxx gun specialization" skills so that the skill would not "grant" a 2% dmg increase per level but only 1%? i'm sure most if not all of them would scream out loud and clear that they "invested" training time and they dont deserve to be nerfed...
if "static" is consdered to be bad then find other means to enforce activity - but datacores gain should stay with R&D agents where it was and all those eager to get their hands on some "free" datacores should do the same effort to have them handy...



Confirming that you are, in fact, the first player to ever have been adversely affected by a change in game mechanics.

Seriously, I don't agree at all that datacores should be tied to FW. It simply doesn't make sense that the faction militias would be the primary purveyors of engineering knowledge in the universe.

That said, the existing mechanic is pretty poor, too. Anything that encourages using an army of alts to passively farm items is clearly silly.

As for the shitload of skills to 5: They're almost entirely the same skills used in invention, so they haven't been rendered useless. Don't be so melodramatic.


in fact , since 2003 we've been screwed... errr... "adversely affected " several (dozens) times by all kind of changes in game mechanics - and i'm still here so at the end of the day i was able to survive GAME changes... the main issue i'm pointing on is some (including this datacores one) changes are rather radical screwes then lucrative tweaks, affecting way too much training-time-wise... when i've decided to folow the scientist path, investing several good months into the process the perspective was clear... therfore any changes to the "outcome" should be either a resonable (and/or justified) tweak - for example: one should "validate" his daily datacores harvest by visiting the agent every day... or, even better, if radical changes ar to be made, one should at least have the opportunity to reallocate, at will, all the skillpoints in the changed area, coresponding to the new "improved" game reality...

and no: i'm not melodramatic, i'm angry: almost as angry as i was when exploration was screwed... when another several good months of speced training time suddently ment sht and i was supposed to run side by side with every 2 months old chars who decided that spawning probes is "fun"... grrrr...


I trained scanning skills before the change too, and, you know what?

The scanning change was probably one of the single biggest gameplay improvements to date. They took a system that was an obnoxious novelty and turned it into a real profession.


well... it was a good one indeed... not quite the biggest but it was actually an essential improvement to exploring mechanics... and i've never said otherwise... my point is they need to tweak results more carefully not just nerfing old system... my anger was against a nerf puting me after many months of training to run side by side with every 2 months old chars who decided that spawning probes is "fun"... and before you react i will quote from another post i had above:

"...older AND MORE SKILLED players should always have A SMALL advantage... for example a young (2 months old explorer with skills at lvl 4) should be able to find 1/10s. 2/10s and 3/10s plexes in highsec space but should need to have skills at lvl 5 in order to find the 4/10s... if we'd consider datacores aquisition: having the science skills at lvl 4 isnt that hard to aquire - max 2 weeks - and it would grant you a nice +250 RP/day from an R&D agent VS my 300 RP/day... it doesnt sound that bad considering i've wasted at least 3-4 months training time for those extra 50 RP/day... "

care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread

clixor
Celluloid Gurus
#45 - 2012-05-18 10:33:06 UTC
Volar Kang wrote:
clixor wrote:
[quote=Tadeo Musashy]

So my advice to players who trained the skills, either go actually use the science skills and go invent. Or sell the char.



How can I invent when I just lost half my cores and who wants to buy a char with useless skills? I'm not saying the datacore change is the gamebreaker here but when you add it to the coming change of T2 production in low/null sec only, many of the small invention corps just took a hit to the chin.


There is a thing called the market where you can buy everything you want, including cores.. amazing no ;)

And any somewhat serious inventor gets the cores on the market anyway because:
a) you need way more cores than you get from (a few) agents
b) you need to include the costs in your calculations anyway
c) picking up the cores on a regular basis is a waste of time in terms of isk/h

T2 projected changes is a whole different story, that actually could have a large (intentional) effect. The cores changes doesn't change anything for manufacturers.
Haulie Berry
#46 - 2012-05-18 13:20:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
clixor wrote:
Volar Kang wrote:
clixor wrote:
Tadeo Musashy wrote:


So my advice to players who trained the skills, either go actually use the science skills and go invent. Or sell the char.



How can I invent when I just lost half my cores and who wants to buy a char with useless skills? I'm not saying the datacore change is the gamebreaker here but when you add it to the coming change of T2 production in low/null sec only, many of the small invention corps just took a hit to the chin.


There is a thing called the market where you can buy everything you want, including cores.. amazing no ;)

And any somewhat serious inventor gets the cores on the market anyway because:
a) you need way more cores than you get from (a few) agents
b) you need to include the costs in your calculations anyway
c) picking up the cores on a regular basis is a waste of time in terms of isk/h

T2 projected changes is a whole different story, that actually could have a large (intentional) effect. The cores changes doesn't change anything for manufacturers.


Inventors who farm their own datacores = comedy goldmine.

[quote]my point is they need to tweak results more carefully not just nerfing old system...


They didn't nerf it (exploration), though. They buffed it. They buffed the **** out of it, in fact. And, there is still an advantage to having high scanning skills. Go try to scan down the weakest sigs with **** scanning skills in an unspecialized ship. You can also scan down sites in less time and with fewer scans.

This marginal advantage is COMPLETELY consistent with almost every other system in the game. My combat pilot has near-perfect skills for almost every subcap in the game. Any idiot can get in a raven in a month or two and run the same missions that I can. They won't run them as quickly, but they will be able to do it.

My manufacturer has near-perfect invention skills. Anyone can start doing invention, and, with level 4s in the encryption and datacore skills - which is about 17.7% of the skillpoints I've sunk into it for 5s - they will enjoy ~95% (and this is an actual, calculated value, not a number pulled from nothing) of my base success rate.

The trouble for you seems to be that, in buffing exploration, they ruined its exclusivity. Still a buff to exploration, just a nerf to your ego. That's a personal problem, not a game design problem.


If nothing else, I would appreciate it if you guys would stop referring to this as an "industry" nerf, because it ******* isn't. It's a research agent nerf, which is a pretty small portion of industry as a whole.

I'm an industrialist. This will have absolutely ZERO negative impact on me. It will be neutral, at worst. I might even see a small benefit. Despite having all of the requisite skills trained to five (except for research project management), I have never bothered with research agents. The value was too minimal to justify the effort. So, for me, this change will mean the following:

1. Datacore prices will change. They will probably fluctuate a bit at first, but I'm reasonably certain that, long term, they're going to settle in at a lower price than they were a month ago (before the speculation began). This doesn't really matter to me. If the price goes up, that additional cost will be passed onto consumers. No skin off my back. If the price comes down, that additional savings will be passed onto consumers. Again, I come out unscathed.

2. More inventors will have to buy datacores. This is actually pretty sweet for me. I already buy all of mine, so no change there for me. Having to buy datacores, though, will force other inventors to understand that they have an independent value (and cost) and ameliorate inappropriately low margins due to the datacores-I-harvest-myself-are-free effect. I don't expect this to be a huge change, but it can't hurt.

3. While it's really only tangentially related, hopefully the FW changes will yield increased pewpew. Explosions are always good for my bottom line.

4. At least a few sadsack industry bears are obviously going to ragequit, if not the game, then at least industry, because, like, ohmigosh ceeceepee is, like, sooooo unfair and hates industry!Roll Fewer producers = lower demand for datacores and, also, lower supply of finished goods. This is good for me.

So, on the whole, I would not call this a nerf to industry. It's a nerf to a small portion of industry, with fringe benefits that far outweigh it.

I still don't like the concept of tying FW to invention because it makes poor IC sense, but this is certainly not going to harm me financially.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#47 - 2012-05-18 15:15:47 UTC
zoni Ishikela wrote:

Datacores, like botting and ganking, shouldn't be that easy to farm and should require a minimal amount of effort.


Which is a fine goal, but then why did they not add them to the LP stores of the NPC corps that already specialized in Research & Development?

No, they decided to rob Peter to pay Paul and move them over to the FW LP stores.

At the minimum, they should have been added to the NPC R&D corp stores in addition to being added to the FW LP stores.
Haulie Berry
#48 - 2012-05-18 15:21:01 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
zoni Ishikela wrote:

Datacores, like botting and ganking, shouldn't be that easy to farm and should require a minimal amount of effort.


Which is a fine goal, but then why did they not add them to the LP stores of the NPC corps that already specialized in Research & Development?

No, they decided to rob Peter to pay Paul and move them over to the FW LP stores.

At the minimum, they should have been added to the NPC R&D corp stores in addition to being added to the FW LP stores.



This, I fully agree with. Killing the passive income is all well and good, but the association with faction war is bizarre and forced.
zoni Ishikela
State War Academy
Caldari State
#49 - 2012-05-18 22:29:17 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
zoni Ishikela wrote:

Datacores, like botting and ganking, shouldn't be that easy to farm and should require a minimal amount of effort.


Which is a fine goal, but then why did they not add them to the LP stores of the NPC corps that already specialized in Research & Development?

No, they decided to rob Peter to pay Paul and move them over to the FW LP stores.

At the minimum, they should have been added to the NPC R&D corp stores in addition to being added to the FW LP stores.



This, I fully agree with. Killing the passive income is all well and good, but the association with faction war is bizarre and forced.


Yes it is very odd, and yet is in line with the stated CCP goal to increase combat. It's a very peculiar way of linking research with combat and in a way does force me to get into combat skills that I've avoided like the plague. The general tone of the new update is war themed, and perhaps we're seeing a stretch in creativity here... Then again, just put datacores as mission rewards and be done with it - seems simpler.

Z.
Haulie Berry
#50 - 2012-05-18 22:46:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Haulie Berry
zoni Ishikela wrote:


Yes it is very odd, and yet is in line with the stated CCP goal to increase combat.

Z.


The FW mechanics changes and LP schedule changes alone would have done that.
Tadeo Musashy
Doomheim
#51 - 2012-05-18 23:28:08 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:

They didn't nerf it (exploration), though. They buffed it. They buffed the **** out of it, in fact.

that depende on what would one consider important: if u care about the exploring mechanics, about scanning system interface - both graphics and handyness, about time needed to pinpoint a sig and maybe few others "about", then yes, agree with you ...indeed they buffed it... but if we are counting how many systems one has to scan in order to find a worthy sig we could call it a nerf isnt it?

Haulie Berry wrote:
And, there is still an advantage to having high scanning skills. Go try to scan down the weakest sigs with **** scanning skills in an unspecialized ship. You can also scan down sites in less time and with fewer scans.
This marginal advantage is COMPLETELY consistent with almost every other system in the game. My combat pilot has near-perfect skills for almost every subcap in the game. Any idiot can get in a raven in a month or two and run the same missions that I can. They won't run them as quickly, but they will be able to do it.

i have to disagree here... that "marginal" advantage is nowhere near what it should be in order to call it "COMPLETELY consistent"... i'm able to finish AE, killing everything, including bonus room in less the 35mins... a 3 months old char would finally be able to do it, but never in less then 70 mins (and make that +120 mins for some accuracy)... so, my efficiency is at least 2x bigger then his/hers... not to mention there are AEs for everyone - having my mission wouldnt deny anyone having his/hers... while considering exploration - i'm nowhere near being twice as efficient as the 3month'er and on top of that a radar site is "consumed" once it is found/cleared... it would respawn somewhere indeed but given the fact almost anyone is able to search and find it (due to the "buff" ofc) i end in competing directly against any probe spawner... that would bring us to the truth below

Haulie Berry wrote:
The trouble for you seems to be that, in buffing exploration, they ruined its exclusivity. Still a buff to exploration, just a nerf to your ego. That's a personal problem, not a game design problem.

partially right BUT i wasted at least 3-4 months of trainig time for exactlly that purpose: exclusivity... because those were the rules at that time i made the judgement and decided accordingly...

Haulie Berry wrote:
If nothing else, I would appreciate it if you guys would stop referring to this as an "industry" nerf, because it ******* isn't. It's a research agent nerf, which is a pretty small portion of industry as a whole.

same thing for the research agent / "passive income" mechanics nerf : i've made my decision folowing the rules in place at that spec moment and "wasted" precious training time in the proccess... i can understamd there may be reasons for CHANGES and sure thing i would adapt any new "system"... but i would also expect at least the courtesy to have the option to reallocate the SPs i would consider "wasted" because of the changes - thats not a whinne but a resonable and documented expectation...

care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread

Haulie Berry
#52 - 2012-05-19 00:01:56 UTC
I still have a pretty easy time finding "worthy" sigs, and it probably takes me less time than it did under the old initiate scan -> go do taxes, read War & Peace in original Russian, learn to juggle chainsaws, come back, rinse, repeat system. If you know how to use DSPs it's a breeze.

Re: missions - AE is a particularly lengthy mission. When you average it out over all of the missions, including the easily blitzable ones, that "2x efficiency" drops substantially.

I'm sorry you feel you "wasted" your training time because you don't know how to find good sigs now. The scanning skills are still objectively immensely useful for both PvE and PvP so, again: Personal problem.

As for the research skills, same story, really. Do invention. Those skills have a purpose beyond what you're using them for. A much better purpose, at that.
Tadeo Musashy
Doomheim
#53 - 2012-05-19 00:36:58 UTC
Haulie Berry wrote:
I still have a pretty easy time finding "worthy" sigs, and it probably takes me less time than it did under the old initiate scan -> go do taxes, read War & Peace in original Russian, learn to juggle chainsaws, come back, rinse, repeat system. If you know how to use DSPs it's a breeze.

i allready agreed the new system is way superior... and i have all the easy finds i'd need - i also ALWAYS outrun the exploring competitors (IF they havent allready cleared the place)

Haulie Berry wrote:
Re: missions - AE is a particularly lengthy mission. When you average it out over all of the missions, including the easily blitzable ones, that "2x efficiency" drops substantially.

no it doesnt - as i said AE efficiency is more like 4x VS a 3 month'er... the 2x i was talking about is the average one...

Haulie Berry wrote:
I'm sorry you feel you "wasted" your training time because you don't know how to find good sigs now. The scanning skills are still objectively immensely useful for both PvE and PvP so, again: Personal problem.

i "know" how to... its just that in current system i'd do the same with skills at lvl 4, leaving me with +3 months time i may have better use for... (as a sidenote: i'm 99.9% sure i wouldnt reallocate those SP even if option would be available - still... i consider it is a matter of fairness from ccp to offer the option)

Haulie Berry wrote:
As for the research skills, same story, really. Do invention. Those skills have a purpose beyond what you're using them for. A much better purpose, at that.

my 11's invention slots are working 24/24 -7/7... as said above its just a matter of principle: changing rules in the midle of the game is wrong... even if, i agree, some changes are absolutelly necesary, for that case some kind of compensation should at least be offered...

care about having POLLs available in forum threads? https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=115634&find=unread

Marcus McTavish
Volcel Police
#54 - 2012-05-19 13:35:43 UTC
Datacore farming is very easy. People just dont like training up to that point.

I used to run level 4 missions, i got high standings, and decided to train RPM, now i have 5 Datacore agents! I dont invent anymore, but that doesnt make it easy.

Datacores were Moons on a personal level, and they cant be attacked! Thats why they are being changed!!!
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2012-05-20 12:57:18 UTC
Marcus McTavish wrote:
Datacore farming is very easy. People just dont like training up to that point.

I used to run level 4 missions, i got high standings, and decided to train RPM, now i have 5 Datacore agents! I dont invent anymore, but that doesnt make it easy.

Datacores were Moons on a personal level, and they cant be attacked! Thats why they are being changed!!!
Yeah, and we see CCP is moving to nerf moon goo production in this patch, as well? Hmmmm.

+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark “Seleene” Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith.

beor oranes
Annihilate.
Strictly Unprofessional
#56 - 2012-05-20 16:14:45 UTC
Tadeo Musashy wrote:

So basically i am using the (common sense) argument that rules must not be changed in the midle of the game - at least not in a significant way.


So CCP have never changed ships or mods? Lets see what I can remember (in not particular order); stacking penalty, AoE Torps, multiple propulsion mods (4 MWD Raven 4TW), HAM Ranges, Remote AoE DD, AoE DD, Super Cap HP, Siege/Triage timers, ship hull HP boosts, Focused DD (not able to hit subcaps), Titan XL Gun Tracking, Nano Nerf, Nos Nerf, T2 Ammo drawbacks, Hybrid buffs, Web Nerfs, Projectile buff, Rigs sizes, invention (removal of the lottery), Faction Ship Rebalance, Scram change, ECM Nerf (or Falcon Nerf). The list could go on and this isn't counting things like Sov Changes (which have happened a few times). Some of these changes are small, some are massive, but all have changed the rules and some in a very significant way. The rules change all the time, if they hadn't changed the rules Eve would have most likely have died for just been an extremely niche game with only a few thousand players.

What they are doing is changing something that affects YOUR game play in a significant way, there are many out there that this change will not alter their game play at all, in fact there are probably some that will not even know that the change has happened.

Honestly, if this is the only reason you play Eve then you are missing out on one of the best MMO's that has been made as there is a lot more out there that you are not experiencing. It wasn't a particularly good way to make isk (I can make more doing invention in a week with the same number of chars as you are using than you do in a month and I use the same skills) but it was totally risk free. Yes you had to put time into it and some money but once you have it going its doesn't cost you anything really to keep receiving datacores from.

Until the patch hits and the market settles we wont know how much it will affect the datacore market and until that time just keep collecting your risk free isk...
beor oranes
Annihilate.
Strictly Unprofessional
#57 - 2012-05-20 16:26:17 UTC
Tadeo Musashy wrote:
changing rules in the midle of the game is wrong... even if, i agree, some changes are absolutelly necesary, for that case some kind of compensation should at least be offered...


How much? 100mil a char? 1bil a char? All your skills back? Additional game time for the time you 'wasted' doing the grinding?

What about all the other changes that affected peoples play. Lets take the nano-nerf as an example; people were spending billions on ships, mods and implants but the prices after the patch of the mods they had already bought dropped through the floor in a lot of cases but CCP didn't refund the difference of the costs, remember it was a stealth nerf, they didn't announce it so people couldn't profit off the change, one day it was there the next it wasn't.

How about the Titan nerf recently? CCP hasn't refunded the pilots their SP or isk if now they find that they cant use their Titan in the same way and in many cases has meant they have completely unsubbed their account.

They were both major changes of the rules but CCP did nothing to compensate (though I think you could get your rigs or implants unplugged with the nano nerf but its was awhile ago and I cant remember) the people who's game it negatively affected, why is this change any different from the countless others that have gone on before and is worthy of compensation?! ecause it is changing your game play?!
Fabulousli Obvious
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#58 - 2012-05-20 18:18:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Fabulousli Obvious
Sigh.

Datacores, Datacores, FW, Datacores, Loot drops, Drone regions nerf, New Mods, New Inventory UI, upending of the Mercenary 'Ally' System....and more Datacores and FW. AAARRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!


All I have to say is that after taking a look at the new Inventory UI on Day One on Sisi and bashing my head (along with hundreds of others) against the Brick Wall of Devs until now,.......and it is STILL going to slap the sillies into the 85%, who do not go to Sisi or read the Forums, this Tuesday Morning.

Personally, I just don't think CCP has any idea of what they are really wanting to do anymore. It all just smacks of randomness, with employees and devs doing busywork instead of developing MIND-BLOWING THINGS like Wormholes.

It's sad we are REDUCED to nit-picking about F'ing Datacores. God help us all.


And I pay 15 a month for that ? No thanks. It's not even worth a Dime.

I am NOT YOUNG ENOUGH to know EVERYTHING.  ~~ Oscar Wilde, writer, d. November 30, 1900

Volar Kang
Kang Industrial
#59 - 2012-05-21 01:38:58 UTC
Fabulousli Obvious wrote:
Sigh.

It all just smacks of randomness, with employees and devs doing busywork instead of developing MIND-BLOWING THINGS like Wormholes.


This is the part I have an issue with. I dont feel this was thought through enough. I can almost understand the cut to cores on R&D agents but the move to add them to the FW LP store? I dont follow the logic. I'm also sad to see the same song and dance about "we will look into it later" concerning the wasted time many of us invested in training the skills and earning the corp faction rep. It seems like they push more and more to the C-List every year and waste time on features that no one is asking for.
Tasiv Deka
End-of-Line
#60 - 2012-05-21 01:46:23 UTC
Volar Kang wrote:
Fabulousli Obvious wrote:
Sigh.

It all just smacks of randomness, with employees and devs doing busywork instead of developing MIND-BLOWING THINGS like Wormholes.


This is the part I have an issue with. I dont feel this was thought through enough. I can almost understand the cut to cores on R&D agents but the move to add them to the FW LP store? I dont follow the logic. I'm also sad to see the same song and dance about "we will look into it later" concerning the wasted time many of us invested in training the skills and earning the corp faction rep. It seems like they push more and more to the C-List every year and waste time on features that no one is asking for.

well in real life tech has always leapt forward during wartime... look at medical advances in regards to when the countries who made them were in warso it does make some sense that a navy would begin to dish out tech that they have been working on

Oh, Do go on... no seriously ive got nothing better to do then listen to all the petty arguments and feeble trolling attempts... 

The sad thing is i'm not sure if i'm telling the truth.