These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev Blog: Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just don’t call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog

First post First post First post
Author
Lithorn
State War Academy
Caldari State
#621 - 2013-05-01 00:20:51 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Myntelle NicAtoch wrote:

The best solutions are the ones we come up with ourselves. Let us anchor multiple stations per system, and WE will deal with production capacity in null sec, you won't need to tweak anything.

iirc this is less a C.C.P insists you not do this for game balance issue and more an "oh god eight year old spaghetti code that if we touch will break everything" preventing it


That sounds alot like what C.C.P-Soundwave would say and i'm sure that's correct. This would present additional problems in the unintended consequences category of conquering systems.
You would now have to R.F. each and every station X number of times for each station in the system in order to take Sov if C.C.P allowed that under current Sov bashing mechanics. If you think doing R.F. timers for multiple constellations sucks now try doing this with a crap load of stations in each system . Other misc concerns like this would make systems too campy and self sustaining so people would not ever need to travel much. Etc. Etc..
I think adding more office slots is a great idea and one that does not really negatively impact game play in any significant way, if anything its quite the opposite for station owners.
Grippa Dets
Doomheim
#622 - 2013-05-01 00:21:06 UTC
Seems the real problem is not the mining or the ice, but the lack of access to T2 production.

T2 building basically requires a POS for invention, and the ice prices will make POS fuel go up. Without the passive ice mining we can't earn as well, and our fuel expenses get inflated.

So solo POS and production is out.

How about group POS sharing in an indy corp - well no way, not in a game that celebrates robbery and betrayal. Shaming or bounty-ing wont make up for stolen BPOs. It's too bad because players with time constraints could work together on production, popping in when they can to move product to the next stage.

So group work is out.

How about public stations -- the lines are way too long to be effective.

I want to like these changes, but I'm still not convinced I'm going to take quite a hit. And it still feels like I'm being pushed into conflict, when all I want to do is enjoy the environment and build stuff.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#623 - 2013-05-01 00:23:36 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
If you can do the extra effort it takes to set up an organization that can get enough miners into an ice belt to one cycle it the second it spawns why shouldn't you be able to screw over people who aren't quite as organized?

If you don't like it maybe you should do something to disrupt organized playergroups like, wardec, wait no no, I know, suicide gank, no that won't work, Bump, no that's stupid. Well I guess you're boned because you are never going to leave highsec. Bye!


It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.

I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.
And seriously, nobody with a soul is going to waste 4 hours of their time for ice, even if it costed 1200 ISK pu. The quantity would not justify it.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#624 - 2013-05-01 00:31:56 UTC
A much friendlier implementation would be a new skill: "mining permit" (yeah James, that's in your honor).

Each rank allows to mine for 1 more hour a day, then the account is disabled at ice mining till next downtime.


Doing this, everyone who has RL time constraints could still log in and do his job, while the total quantity would be reduced by 5-6 times vs today. That reduction would still cause prices to go above Hulkageddon days prices so the profitability CCP wants would be there.
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#625 - 2013-05-01 00:46:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

You'll always have the option of up to 72 offices in CCP-US if you fully upgrade, that should help with the overflow.

yes but it's like a dinner party the people slightly farther away at the less desirable table feel left out :argh:

oh well, the new offices everywhere nearby should help enough, thanks!


You need somewhere to put the children.

Comedy answer: alternatively feel free to have fewer friends. Big smile


The problem is, to organize and secure anything you need corporate hangers. So why not decouple corporate hangers from offices so we are not forced into not being able to do real production in a station when any station with a refinery and slots (that you need hangers in) can't have many offices.

People want offices for corp hangers, it is silly to have some artificial limit on that.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#626 - 2013-05-01 00:49:08 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.

you don't have a right to success

some things in this game are for the better players

(also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)
Crexa
Ion Industrials
#627 - 2013-05-01 00:57:10 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.

you don't have a right to success

some things in this game are for the better players

(also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)



No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success.

Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec.

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#628 - 2013-05-01 01:00:25 UTC
Crexa wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.

you don't have a right to success

some things in this game are for the better players

(also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)



No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success.

Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec.

Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Crexa
Ion Industrials
#629 - 2013-05-01 01:02:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Crexa
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Crexa wrote:
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:

I could be the most hard core ever, yet without an extensive playtime to cover 4 hours, I'd never get a decent belt.

you don't have a right to success

some things in this game are for the better players

(also a one hour miner will get some ice one out of four times)



No you don't have a right to success. But you have a right to get an equal chance at success.

Seriously, why are big alliance players concerned about this? By the way you would explain it, it doesn't impact you at all. So why comment on it at all? Unless it does impact you, impact you in a positive way. Say by giving you another commodity to export to highsec.

Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.



Where are you getting that number? It doesn't mean that higher prices won't influence some to mine it in 0.0 and return it to empire. Besides, if that was a concern you would think pos heavy alliances would want a lower ice price as it reduces their cost. Unless they already have so much isk that its of no concern and high pos costs keeps the riff raff out.

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#630 - 2013-05-01 01:07:57 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?
Crexa
Ion Industrials
#631 - 2013-05-01 01:11:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Crexa
EI Digin wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?



Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine? And anyone who mines the ice nearest the hubs has an advantage. So while there may be ice in another system, you won't know that for sure. And one of the worst enemies of the industrialist is travel time.

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#632 - 2013-05-01 01:32:48 UTC
Crexa wrote:
Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine?
Not enough to finish completely 80+ new ice anomalies within 4 hours and lock players out from ice mining in highsec.

Crexa wrote:

And anyone who mines the ice nearest the hubs has an advantage. So while there may be ice in another system, you won't know that for sure. And one of the worst enemies of the industrialist is travel time.
No one will know for sure when the site respawns (except for the people who were in the site when it was last finished, but if you put effort into scouting the site you should be rewarded), so everyone gets a fair shot at finding the next one.
Frying Doom
#633 - 2013-05-01 01:55:08 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?

80 high sec systems? Are you sure?

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#634 - 2013-05-01 02:03:51 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?

80 high sec systems? Are you sure?


24 Amarr systems (listed from blog)
19 Minmatar systems with Glacial Mass and secstatus above 0.5
23 Caldari systems with White Glaze and secstatus above 0.5
15 Gallente systems with Blue Ice and secstatus above 0.5

is 81 systems
Frying Doom
#635 - 2013-05-01 02:25:08 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
It's not effort, it's T I M E R S.
There are approximately 80 systems that will have ice anomalies. No news on how many anomalies will spawn per system. Do you think every single one of them will be finished within 4 hours?

80 high sec systems? Are you sure?


24 Amarr systems (listed from blog)
19 Minmatar systems with Glacial Mass and secstatus above 0.5
23 Caldari systems with White Glaze and secstatus above 0.5
15 Gallente systems with Blue Ice and secstatus above 0.5

is 81 systems

Thanks for that. I dont normally Ice mine but I will admit when I re-read the blog I noticed. " All low-security and null-security systems that currently contain static ice belts, as well as all high security systems in Caldari, Gallente and Minmatar space that contain static ice belts, will contain the new ice anomalies."

I thought it was just hi-sec that was getting the change.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Nitrogen Isotopes
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#636 - 2013-05-01 02:27:00 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.


High sec might produce ~66% more isotopes than it needs. Interestingly enough, there is more to ice than isotopes.
Dasquirrel715
Aurora.
The Initiative.
#637 - 2013-05-01 02:31:43 UTC
Ereilian wrote:
Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?


I know this is a little late in this thread, but you guys who whine about your poses not being worthwhile do realize that as fuel prices go up, the price of the things produced on, and by, those poses will go up naturally as well. That is how a market works. The current prices on things weren't set arbitrarily. They have evolved and developed as the market expanded.
Crexa
Ion Industrials
#638 - 2013-05-01 02:39:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Crexa
EI Digin wrote:
Crexa wrote:
Do you have any idea how many people play Eve and mine?
Not enough to finish completely 80+ new ice anomalies within 4 hours and lock players out from ice mining in highsec.




Crexa wrote:

And anyone who mines the ice nearest the hubs has an advantage. So while there may be ice in another system, you won't know that for sure. And one of the worst enemies of the industrialist is travel time.
No one will know for sure when the site respawns (except for the people who were in the site when it was last finished, but if you put effort into scouting the site you should be rewarded), so everyone gets a fair shot at finding the next one.


Its not about numbers to clear all 80, its about concentration. Take for instance the belt in Halaima, Caldari space on average their are 60-100 mining the belt at any given time. Now you are telling a good portion of them to **** off and go somewhere else. Which ok lets for arguments sake is just what we do. Now they go next door to Kamio and it has a likewise number of miners at any given time and surprise surprise that belt is gone too. So you would have the dog chasing its tail all over Caldari space looking for a belt to mine. In the mean time lets say 5 hours have elapsed, you have now added not just the numbers from Kamio, but all those who have logged on in the mean time. Will people spread out like water following the least path of resistance? Normally this is true, until frustration sets in and people just say frak it!




But we made it "easier to find and mine grav sites" not my words Fozzie's. You just added a whole level (by implying scouting) of complexity and headache the average miner doesn't want. How is that easier?



Ps. OH and lest we forget, we will be moving Orcas, Exhumers, and Freighters. The slowest moving craft in all of EVE.

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

Crexa
Ion Industrials
#639 - 2013-05-01 02:43:03 UTC
Dasquirrel715 wrote:
Ereilian wrote:
Are you willing to commit to revisiting the proportion of high sec/low sec/null sec distribution IF the market prices get out of control (and by that I mean if POS ownership becomes unviable). Alternatively would you be willing to commit to looking at reducing the respawn timer on the new anoms?


I know this is a little late in this thread, but you guys who whine about your poses not being worthwhile do realize that as fuel prices go up, the price of the things produced on, and by, those poses will go up naturally as well. That is how a market works. The current prices on things weren't set arbitrarily. They have evolved and developed as the market expanded.


Ill tell that to the guys using it for research. I'm sure they will see things your way. Evil

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#640 - 2013-05-01 03:13:22 UTC
Crexa wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Why would they export to high sec, high sec will produce ~66% more ice than it needs, if anything they will still import from high sec.



Where are you getting that number? It doesn't mean that higher prices won't influence some to mine it in 0.0 and return it to empire. Besides, if that was a concern you would think pos heavy alliances would want a lower ice price as it reduces their cost. Unless they already have so much isk that its of no concern and high pos costs keeps the riff raff out.

CCP Fozzie wrote:


Currently 98.4% of all isotope ice is mined in highsec.

While highsec uses less than 15% of the isotopes in EVE.

I suppose I should have said isotopes.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.