These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p

First post First post
Author
Scud Maximillion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#741 - 2012-07-25 19:27:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Scud Maximillion
Lord Zim wrote:
3 reasons to hold space prior to patch:
1) Moons.
2) Build supercaps.
3) **** off someone who wanted the space you just took away from them.

Post patch:
1) Build supercaps
2) **** off someone who wanted the space you took away from them.

Ahh, progress.



Of every comment made on this board, this is likely the truest.

I don't care about the nerf, but it needed to be done in a structured manner that:

(a) rewarded group activities which truly favoured the better organized alliances. In other words, if you took a hit from the nerf, you could make it back by harnassing the manpower available. Terrible alliances die and good alliances get better. However, none of this happened.

(b) ensured there remained reasons to fight strategically. This removed a major reason to invade another region/system. There needs to be a reason to claim sov and do everything possible to hold it. Let us not forget that a tech moon represented more than income. It also represented a battlefield, where after reinformcement, the moon represented effectively schedule pvp. Both sides knew the timer and showed up for the fight. Now that battlefied is gone. What replaced it...nothing.

CCP needs to make changes based on a vision of how all the parts fit together. It should not simply react to a problem, and in so doing, create more problems. What I see is a lack of structure.
Nethras
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#742 - 2012-07-26 03:17:22 UTC
Lorna Sicling wrote:
You can never treat something as "free" when you have to harvest it. The problem with moon mining is that the effort required is all about the initial setup and then the limited logistics afterwards.


Ok, so lets calculate how much it costs to mine said cobalt - you need a fueled tower and a moon mining module. The first you need for the reaction, and the second is just a one time cost to stick on instead of a silo. Hmm, no remaining costs, so this comes out to a whopping grand total of ZERO ISK. Sure, you COULD value the cobalt and instead not have fuel costs for your reaction, but either way, market will be driven by effectively free cobalt with that many moons. And mining on your reaction POS is LESS effort than hauling it to the POS. You don't count things as free if you're putting in the same effort and have the same costs as someone selling on the market - in this case for cobalt, you're putting in zero effort (negative effort if compared to buying the cobalt) and have no costs you wouldn't have to do the reactions period. This is one of the few cases where something is totally free, because again, you have no effort and no isk needed to get it if you're doing your reactions on a cobalt moon.

Note that flooring the price of moon minerals ALSO floors the potential profits from ring mining as that was supposedly going to be the high value product you'd get. It's not like shooting for low tech prices is invalid or anything, but I think a lot of people at this point would like a response from CCP acknowledging that they haven't backed off their initial conservative approach on the flawed assumption that current market prices are a remotely accurate prediction of the future or of actual costs to do the reaction and realize how much this is likely to crash things. Remember how high mineral prices were due to speculation, and how most of them crashed.


I mean, they could avoid the fuel price crash by removing all highsec ice belts, but that might have other problems. Pirate
Rhiana O'Bludger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#743 - 2012-07-26 03:47:43 UTC
well it seems renting 0.0 space may be the new afk alliance money spinner now.

thank-god you goonswarm and co guys have always been trustworthy and have never scammed, it will make renting out all your newly conquered space that much easier.

well done to to ccp for making the first babysteps into hopefully a revamed moon mineral/mining/idustiral/t2 production system.

Enzaki
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#744 - 2012-07-26 05:30:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Enzaki
Grath Telkin wrote:
Enzaki wrote:
SRY DEV'S BUT IS BE 2 MONTH NOW AND NO ANSWERS FOR 2 MONTHS IN THES POST HERE https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112481&p=74


You aren't getting a response because the inventory is fine for everybody with an IQ above 14.


ccp alt spotted !!!! → Grath Telkin ←
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#745 - 2012-07-26 06:59:25 UTC
I'd just like to confirm that anyone who disagrees with you is a CCP alt. Any argument they make is therefore unfounded, biased and void, ensuring that everything you say is completely indisputable.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#746 - 2012-07-26 10:03:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Moon materials should just be available from other sources whether using existing or new mining barges.

This alchemy implementation just sounds dumb.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#747 - 2012-07-26 11:33:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Vera Algaert
Goonswarm leadership has been advocating for a Technetium nerf for a very long time - and now that it actually comes they are all mad about CCP removing valuable content from the game?

lolwut

.

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#748 - 2012-07-26 12:27:34 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
Goonswarm leadership has been advocating for a Technetium nerf for a very long time - and now that it actually comes they are all mad about CCP removing valuable content from the game?

lolwut


I think we need to reduce our use of fossil fuels but I'd still be pretty mad if we started burning puppies instead.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#749 - 2012-07-26 13:48:46 UTC
Yeep wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
Goonswarm leadership has been advocating for a Technetium nerf for a very long time - and now that it actually comes they are all mad about CCP removing valuable content from the game?

lolwut


I think we need to reduce our use of fossil fuels but I'd still be pretty mad if we started burning puppies instead.


LOL

Did you really expect CCP to get it right first time? Just let then stick to their plan and release a half arsed, broken feature > we rage > the fix it slightly > we stfu... it all works out in the end

Dramaticus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#750 - 2012-07-26 14:33:01 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
Goonswarm leadership has been advocating for a Technetium nerf for a very long time - and now that it actually comes they are all mad about CCP removing valuable content from the game?

lolwut


We've been discussing possible Tech nerf outcomes for a very long time and a few of us held out hope that CCP would do this intelligently and not just waddle in and wave the alchemy stick around again.

The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal

The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them

Dramaticus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#751 - 2012-07-26 14:34:14 UTC
Rhiana O'Bludger wrote:
well it seems renting 0.0 space may be the new afk alliance money spinner now.

thank-god you goonswarm and co guys have always been trustworthy and have never scammed, it will make renting out all your newly conquered space that much easier.

well done to to ccp for making the first babysteps into hopefully a revamed moon mineral/mining/idustiral/t2 production system.



We're going to rent out our Black Ops dudes to other alliances and allow them to camp third-party alliance's renters.

The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal

The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#752 - 2012-07-26 15:34:02 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
Goonswarm leadership has been advocating for a Technetium nerf for a very long time - and now that it actually comes they are all mad about CCP removing valuable content from the game?

lolwut


Ok genius, whats left to fight over after this?


Owning space sucks, its boring, thankless, and nothing more than a burden. CCP destroyed the value of space by adding in the anoms, so true sec matters far less now days. I mean you have alliances like AAA and CVA who keep where they live by default since nobody else in the game wants the space. The 'dumbing down' of space has already greatly reduced the need for conflict around EVE, the moons were one of the last great content creators.


Now that will be gone, what are we supposed to fight over? The entire south already avoids SOV fights of any kind, its just not financially worth the effort.

Now the game over can enjoy what they do because theres no real reason to do anything else.


Its not the money leaving that matters, its the things to fight over being diminished one more time.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Sigras
Conglomo
#753 - 2012-07-26 17:28:11 UTC
you guys are talking about this like they removed moons from the game or something. Even if the worst case scenario happens and your worst projections come true you realize that a technetium moon will still be worth around 2.5 billion isk a month for doing literally nothing but dumping it into a silo?

Im sorry that youve all been spoiled rotten by easy mode isk, but stop whining like little babies because you may actually have to work for your isk like the rest of us do.
Hammer Legion Member
Doomheim
#754 - 2012-07-26 17:56:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Hammer Legion Member
Grath Telkin wrote:

Owning space sucks, its boring, thankless, and nothing more than a burden. CCP destroyed the value of space by adding in the anoms, so true sec matters far less now days.


would you explain to us, why true sec matters today less than before? Big smile

Grath Telkin wrote:

Now that will be gone, what are we supposed to fight over? The entire south already avoids SOV fights of any kind, its just not financially worth the effort.


Grath Telkin wrote:

Its not the money leaving that matters, its the things to fight over being diminished one more time.


so apparently, its not worth doing anything without beeing "financially worth it", but you totally dont care about the money... right?Roll

regards, HML

Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#755 - 2012-07-26 19:32:59 UTC
Hammer Legion Member wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:

Owning space sucks, its boring, thankless, and nothing more than a burden. CCP destroyed the value of space by adding in the anoms, so true sec matters far less now days.


would you explain to us, why true sec matters today less than before? Big smile



hi

when you conquer a system you can install a magical structure called an INFRASTRUCTURE HUB

in it you can install the following devices:

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=2030 <-- generates anomalies that instantly respawn. Truesec does affect these spawns, but no longer affect them in a meaningful way since sanctums and havens were obviated by better types of anoms that spawn in literally any truesec

http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/item.php?type_id=2044 <-- generates instantly respawning gravimetric sites in a system that allow for boundless mining

neither of these upgrades are particularly affected by system truesec, meaning that any shithole you rent out is identical to the good space
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#756 - 2012-07-26 20:23:47 UTC
Hammer Legion Member wrote:


so apparently, its not worth doing anything without beeing "financially worth it", but you totally dont care about the money... right?Roll



I guess you play a different game than everybody else, EVERYTHING in eve is financially motivated, I know you know that and are being purposefully obtuse but I'll put it in print anyway.

People in 0.0 never have fought "just for ***** and giggles" , everything is weighed for its potential gain and or loss and if there is nothing to gain then there will BE no fights and 0.0 will stagnate worse than it is now.


While we realize this will be a multi stage release, the boredom of 0.0 wont make it until some november release, we need MORE things to drive conflicts NOW not later, and taking the last thing left out isn't really the best idea.



Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Hammer Legion Member
Doomheim
#757 - 2012-07-26 20:28:36 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:

neither of these upgrades are particularly affected by system truesec, meaning that any shithole you rent out is identical to the good space


Hi, there!

you are thinking that Hubs are better than Hubs plus other stuff. You are wrong.

regards
HML

regards, HML

RDevz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#758 - 2012-07-26 21:34:45 UTC
Sigras wrote:
literally nothing but dumping it into a silo?


Yes, because tech moons are magical, and the following tasks are all done by pixies with ABSOLUTELY NO EFFORT BY PLAYERS NEEDED:


  • Fuel them when they get low on fuel
  • Empty them when their siloes are full of genuine OTEC brand Technetium
  • Rename the towers to "thecrate sits to pee"
  • Capture them when they're owned by someone not in OTEC
  • Defend them when someone not in OTEC attacks them

~

Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#759 - 2012-07-26 21:39:14 UTC
Hammer Legion Member wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:

neither of these upgrades are particularly affected by system truesec, meaning that any shithole you rent out is identical to the good space


Hi, there!

you are thinking that Hubs are better than Hubs plus other stuff. You are wrong.

regards
HML

don't sign your posts

and they're not, hubs are literally the only anoms worth running
Hammer Legion Member
Doomheim
#760 - 2012-07-26 21:57:19 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:

don't sign your posts


sorry!

regards
HML


btw. try the same with 5 friends of your choice at the same time!

regards, HML