These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

It was a little surprising and quite disappointing to not see Moon Goo forwarded by CSM to CCP IMO.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#41 - 2012-11-22 12:20:30 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Here is another thought.

When normal people really are more knowledgable about a subject they tend to just briefly explain the problems with a novice's idea.

But when people are insecure in their knowledge and can't do that, they tend to lash out and just say things like "thats a terrible idea" and use fallacies like arguing against an idea because of where it comes from, instead of addressing it's merits.


I did address the (complete lack of) merits of your idea. You not liking my conclusion is not really all that important to me, though!




Do you mean where you argue that increasing the value of parts will make the whole less valuable?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Shepard Book
Underground Stargate
#42 - 2012-11-22 12:24:07 UTC
Happy Thanksgiving everyone. I believe moon goo should be taken out of moons and put into belts If farms and fields is the best idea out there, which at this point I think it is. I think this should be put at the top of the list. CCP has already made 0.0 an unhealthy place letting one group control the isk faucets in 0.0 and low sec.

I also think there should be dynamic scaling costs to how much systems an alliance/corp controls. Beef up the systems to support more pilots and make room for others to enter 0.0. The current NAP system needs to be reworked as well unless CCP wants one or two groups controlling most of 0.0.

Enjoy the holiday!
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#43 - 2012-11-22 14:42:57 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Do you mean where you argue that increasing the value of parts will make the whole less valuable?


Fluctuations generally come with a decrease as well. Any decrease at all will make null less desirable.

If you're talking a system where it just stays at the baseline and rises occasionally, that won't make it objectively worse, but it won't lead to actual conquest. This is another one of those "you don't know null very well" things, but even just the act of moving from one region to another is a royal pain in the ass, and that's to say nothing of taking a region from someone who may not want to leave. Nobody's going to do that for what would be a temporary boost in objective worth. What you'd see more than anything is the same large blocs staying put and waiting for their own region's upwards fluctuation.

I know you've got ideas and you want to share them, but your lack of how things work in sov null is really hamstringing you before you even start. You'd really be far better off putting your effort into focusing on improving whatever area of the game it is that you DO take part in, and know about, etc etc all that good stuff.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#44 - 2012-11-22 19:08:10 UTC
At the risk of hijacking the thread and turning it away from a very important topic, moon mining...

Frying Doom wrote:

Actually just that and the fact that yes the amount of minerals currently mined in Null is small compared to hi, we are at a level that has caused the market to be saturated to the point that Hi-sec minerals are worth more per/hr to mine and that is including shipping them to hi-sec.

Source, please. I simply cannot believe this because if it were true, mining would be so much more popular in nullsec and highsec mining groups would be moving in droves, leaving it barren much like you have suggested. To me, being able to ship minerals into highsec and still gaining a profit is just not possible, and should not be possible unless there are major issues with the highsec market (hulkageddon-style events).

Frying Doom wrote:

Oh and as to "Again, this is all dependent on CCP being able to balance things correctly." I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, I cannot think of anything they have ever released that did not need re-balancing or changing later.

As to enough minerals, how much is enough 1 BS worth per person in Null per day, week , month?

With just 10000 people to build a battleship a week that is a lot of minerals not being bought from Hi-sec
Take a simple BS like an apoc that is
102,298,090,000 units of trit a week without counting all the other high sec minerals.

The great thing is that CCP can easily limit supply by making high-yield asteroids hard to come by as there is not much supply to begin with. And I too have my doubts that CCP can do it right.

I would say that ten thousand battleships a week throughout nullsec is simply ridiculous. There isn't enough conflict that would cause that to happen, and very little nullsec groups could stay intact after losing thousands of battleships in such a short period of time. Something on the order of tens of billions trit (less than a day's worth of volume in The Forge) per week scattered all around through the many regions of null, most of it not being mined at all because of security concerns, would vastly improve markets everywhere. In the end it is up to CCP to decide how many minerals to put where, as they have all of the statistics that we cannot see.
Frying Doom
#45 - 2012-11-22 21:48:50 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
At the risk of hijacking the thread and turning it away from a very important topic, moon mining...

Frying Doom wrote:

Actually just that and the fact that yes the amount of minerals currently mined in Null is small compared to hi, we are at a level that has caused the market to be saturated to the point that Hi-sec minerals are worth more per/hr to mine and that is including shipping them to hi-sec.

Source, please. I simply cannot believe this because if it were true, mining would be so much more popular in nullsec and highsec mining groups would be moving in droves, leaving it barren much like you have suggested. To me, being able to ship minerals into highsec and still gaining a profit is just not possible, and should not be possible unless there are major issues with the highsec market (hulkageddon-style events).

The source is the market them selves and the number of Null miners we have had on the forums in the last few months whining about how unprofitable Null mining has become. But also to mine safely in Null you need to be in one of the Alliances there, the bigger the alliance the safer the mining.

EI Digin wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:

Oh and as to "Again, this is all dependent on CCP being able to balance things correctly." I didn't know whether to laugh or cry, I cannot think of anything they have ever released that did not need re-balancing or changing later.

As to enough minerals, how much is enough 1 BS worth per person in Null per day, week , month?

With just 10000 people to build a battleship a week that is a lot of minerals not being bought from Hi-sec
Take a simple BS like an apoc that is
102,298,090,000 units of trit a week without counting all the other high sec minerals.

The great thing is that CCP can easily limit supply by making high-yield asteroids hard to come by as there is not much supply to begin with. And I too have my doubts that CCP can do it right.

I would say that ten thousand battleships a week throughout nullsec is simply ridiculous. There isn't enough conflict that would cause that to happen, and very little nullsec groups could stay intact after losing thousands of battleships in such a short period of time. Something on the order of tens of billions trit (less than a day's worth of volume in The Forge) per week scattered all around through the many regions of null, most of it not being mined at all because of security concerns, would vastly improve markets everywhere. In the end it is up to CCP to decide how many minerals to put where, as they have all of the statistics that we cannot see.

That was why I asked how many minerals and where in Null would you put them? and yes CCP has the statistics but personally I believe the current system of interdependency works better or do you feel that Hi-sec should get some Null minerals as well?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#46 - 2012-11-23 18:42:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Snow Axe wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Do you mean where you argue that increasing the value of parts will make the whole less valuable?


Fluctuations generally come with a decrease as well. Any decrease at all will make null less desirable.


There is no reason there has to be any decrease at all. In fact the worst space can be 100xs more valuable than it is now and then have certain space fluctuate to 10,000xs more valuable. Really I am not trying to guage where the value should be. I am just saying make it so players have a reason to attack new space instead of just sitting in the same place and farming. As long as you make more isk sitting still its hard to justify conquering new space.

BOB attacked other space all the time and produced massive conflicts. But they did it for the fun of it. It clearly wasn't smart gameplay. I'm just saying maybe the game mechanics should encourage that sort of conduct. Make it so that constant massive war to take over space is smart gameplay.

Snow Axe wrote:

If you're talking a system where it just stays at the baseline and rises occasionally, that won't make it objectively worse, but it won't lead to actual conquest. This is another one of those "you don't know null very well" things, but even just the act of moving from one region to another is a royal pain in the ass, and that's to say nothing of taking a region from someone who may not want to leave. Nobody's going to do that for what would be a temporary boost in objective worth. What you'd see more than anything is the same large blocs staying put and waiting for their own region's upwards fluctuation.


The idea is that the fluctuations upward won't happen if the people just sit in the same space. But perhaps there is no good way to implement that. I don't know.

Lets assume that, like you said, the fluctuations just happened somewhat randomly so if you sit in a space you will get it eventually. Don't you think ccp could make these fluctuations large enough and last long enough so that it would be worth up and moving?

One of the reasons I am not interested in null sec is because it is like the pax romana as opposed to the types of conquest made by ghengis khan. Where Ghengis gained by power by constantly taking over new lands, it seems null sec entities gain power by settling in and setting up farms. I would be much more interested in null sec if there were constantly massive wars instead of this massive peace.

Snow Axe wrote:

I know you've got ideas and you want to share them, but your lack of how things work in sov null is really hamstringing you before you even start. You'd really be far better off putting your effort into focusing on improving whatever area of the game it is that you DO take part in, and know about, etc etc all that good stuff.


I don't know that anyone will be better off for posting at all. But I am sympathetic to your view that people who don't understand a part of the game shouldn't be pushing issues. Thats why I am not really pushing this issue. I am just saying what would make me personally interested in null sec and what seems like a sensible way to get there.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#47 - 2012-11-24 20:45:41 UTC
Greetings

Once again marxism rears its ugly head. With the have not 's (read unwilling to try) b*tching about those that risk and create. it must be said, that what the goons have created is possible for any other player. The small minded see a large organization with vast resources and capabilities that are truly inspiring, and once again completely miss the point. It did not happen overnight.

Instead of attempting to rally forces to a cause of "its not fair, it must be changed!". Which in my opinion is already starting off from a weak position of "I can't compete so I will whine against those that do." How about rallying people with a call to action that says "I want what they have built over roughly 6 years of effort, and I am willing to work towards that goal!"

OP you come across as small minded and only look to the near horizon. It is proven over and over that wealth not worked for, is never highly regarded where as wealth earned through hard work is always cherished and nurtured. Which is why after years of work building a coalition of peers, they can field the fleets they field and hold the SOV they hold.

Maybe I have read to much into your post, what it boils down to is that it sounds a lot like your crying, "game too hard, make easier ." In which case Sir I say grow up and put your childish ideas away, go out into the real world and gain knowledge.

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"
Shepard Book
Underground Stargate
#48 - 2012-11-24 21:12:43 UTC
Easthir Ravin wrote:
Greetings

Once again marxism rears its ugly head. With the have not 's (read unwilling to try) b*tching about those that risk and create. it must be said, that what the goons have created is possible for any other player. The small minded see a large organization with vast resources and capabilities that are truly inspiring, and once again completely miss the point. It did not happen overnight.

Instead of attempting to rally forces to a cause of "its not fair, it must be changed!". Which in my opinion is already starting off from a weak position of "I can't compete so I will whine against those that do." How about rallying people with a call to action that says "I want what they have built over roughly 6 years of effort, and I am willing to work towards that goal!"

OP you come across as small minded and only look to the near horizon. It is proven over and over that wealth not worked for, is never highly regarded where as wealth earned through hard work is always cherished and nurtured. Which is why after years of work building a coalition of peers, they can field the fleets they field and hold the SOV they hold.

Maybe I have read to much into your post, what it boils down to is that it sounds a lot like your crying, "game too hard, make easier ." In which case Sir I say grow up and put your childish ideas away, go out into the real world and gain knowledge.


Spoken like a true pet. I was saying this is broken when the Russians were good at diplomacy as well. I understand you have a vested interest in seeing one block control most of 0.0 and become fatter and fatter. Maybe you should point the finger at yourself first. 0.0 SOV and faucet mechanics are unhealthy for the game IMO and your failed attacks on me do not change that. Happy holidays and go Gators!
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#49 - 2012-11-25 01:17:29 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Thank you for taking time to (not) read the elements of your elaborate Goons-run-EVE conspiracy.

Damn. I see you're right back to being an ass-hole.

Do we get to see Aleks the sweetheart again in the run-up to the CSM8 election?

Dam, I see you're right back to posting stinking turds....

Can we get you to not post in the run-up to the CSM 8 election?

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#50 - 2012-11-25 02:19:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Asuri Kinnes
Easthir Ravin wrote:
With the have not 's (read unwilling to try) b*tching about those that risk and create.

Wrong from the start. Not even a good try.

My god, you are so over the top it's hard to take seriously.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.
Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#51 - 2012-11-25 04:22:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Easthir Ravin
Shepard Book wrote:
[quote=Easthir Ravin]Greetings

Spoken like a true pet. I was saying this is broken when the Russians were good at diplomacy as well. I understand you have a vested interest in seeing one block control most of 0.0 and become fatter and fatter. Maybe you should point the finger at yourself first. 0.0 SOV and faucet mechanics are unhealthy for the game IMO and your failed attacks on me do not change that. Happy holidays and go Gators!



Spoken like a true socialist, when you can not win on ideas and discourse along with attacking a mechanic that has functioned as advertised (something is always broken when it benefits someone else regardless of their hard work) you resort to name calling as if that somehow invalidates the opposition's argument. Had I written this with and Alt, i wonder what your come back might have been. You and your ilk always approach EVE with the idea of leveling, fairness or redistribution of wealth. What about competition in your world is fair? In any form of competition there is always a winner and the rest.
EVE will be a far far better place when the rabble realize that, as proven time and time again, players who are driven to be the best at something, be it industry, PVE, Worm Hole, PVP, Pirate, will always end up toward the top of the food chain. While those that complain about their success will be looking up. This is true no matter what game mechanic you may eventually goad CCP into changing in your favor.

I am not unreasonable, if there is a cheat, or glitch, or bot, absolutely crush that because it is outside the intent of the game maker. Let me put this in a way that you might understand. What you are asking is similar to asking a first person shooter game to make sighting with the scope on all weapons react exactly the same and to slow down the player who is more aware and switched-on, so his sights come up at the same rate as other players who may not be as fast. Gee Easthir when you put it that way, it sounds messed up...

Did the Gators win?

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"
Frying Doom
#52 - 2012-11-25 06:54:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Easthir Ravin wrote:
Spoken like a true socialist,

Actually I could not agree more, in this case socialism is to blame.

The Socialist Government (CCP) decided to give a welfare hand out to corps in the Sovereignty Null areas.

Now unfortunately The Socialist Government did not bother to put checks and balances in place, so now in the end we have one alliance, sucking on the proverbial teat while the rest go hungry, starve and eventually come to the forums begging for food.

The saddest part is that some members of that alliance have also come to these forums begging, as their alliance is letting them starve too.

Could we have a moment of silence for all those who live in Null.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#53 - 2012-11-25 09:08:18 UTC
Actually it was the ending of the state-enforced BPO monopoly that made moon-goo so valuable.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Shepard Book
Underground Stargate
#54 - 2012-11-25 15:31:33 UTC
Easthir Ravin wrote:
Shepard Book wrote:
[quote=Easthir Ravin]Greetings

Spoken like a true pet. I was saying this is broken when the Russians were good at diplomacy as well. I understand you have a vested interest in seeing one block control most of 0.0 and become fatter and fatter. Maybe you should point the finger at yourself first. 0.0 SOV and faucet mechanics are unhealthy for the game IMO and your failed attacks on me do not change that. Happy holidays and go Gators!



Spoken like a true socialist, when you can not win on ideas and discourse along with attacking a mechanic that has functioned as advertised (something is always broken when it benefits someone else regardless of their hard work) you resort to name calling as if that somehow invalidates the opposition's argument. Had I written this with and Alt, i wonder what your come back might have been. You and your ilk always approach EVE with the idea of leveling, fairness or redistribution of wealth. What about competition in your world is fair? In any form of competition there is always a winner and the rest.
EVE will be a far far better place when the rabble realize that, as proven time and time again, players who are driven to be the best at something, be it industry, PVE, Worm Hole, PVP, Pirate, will always end up toward the top of the food chain. While those that complain about their success will be looking up. This is true no matter what game mechanic you may eventually goad CCP into changing in your favor.

I am not unreasonable, if there is a cheat, or glitch, or bot, absolutely crush that because it is outside the intent of the game maker. Let me put this in a way that you might understand. What you are asking is similar to asking a first person shooter game to make sighting with the scope on all weapons react exactly the same and to slow down the player who is more aware and switched-on, so his sights come up at the same rate as other players who may not be as fast. Gee Easthir when you put it that way, it sounds messed up...

Did the Gators win?


So you call someone a name and then talk about someone calling someone names. That is all I needed to read.

Gators won despite the zebras. FSUs kicker is pretty good. Notre Dame is in trouble whoever they face from the SEC. They could barley score on USCs defense. I was kinda torn. I can not stand USC but needed them to play as well as the west coast commentators think they can so FLA could advance. Oh well, New Orleans is pretty fun if we get that bowl game. Cheers
Previous page123