These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
First pagePrevious page9899100
 

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#1981 - 2014-06-13 15:45:00 UTC
Leptus wrote:
So CCP is going to force industry players to put all of their BPO's into the POS and at risk . This is not a risk reward design. Industry corps may have billions of isk and years tied up in researched BPO's for copy/ building . This is the industrialist profession and how they sustain income. To force all of our assets into space for the taking is ridiculous. This turns contracts into a shopping list of POS's to plunder for the BPO one is looking for. A couple of BS BPO's are worth attacking a POS, what about the corps with carrier, titans, or T2 BPO's?

If CCP is attempting to cut off supplies and alienate high sec industrialist then this is the way to do it.

Shhh.... no one tell Leptus about BPCs, or he might put them in the POS instead of his BPOs.

Really, it will take two minutes to remove a BPO from POS, assuming you're starting in station in the same system, with a negligible financial loss, because you aren't going to be building off a BPO. That's why CCP is changing copy times to be 80% of build. Your risk isn't actually going up all that much if you know what the heck you're doing.

Yeah, there will be a lot of tears when this hits because of the throngs of players that spent so much time whining about it instead of preparing for it. These players will find themselves kicked out of the profession in the initial rush to pop Research POSes. That will leave the landscape dominated by the active and prepared, and then, eventually, people will learn that it's not worth it to siege a high-sec POS just for the chance at a few BPCs.
KanashiiKami
#1982 - 2014-07-05 05:30:05 UTC
i think the game will truly become game changing if

1) POS now can truly be anchored anywhere, except for restricted zones like 100km away from stargates, from NPC stations, etc.
2) since now bases can be anywhere, MOON GOO should also now be re-randomized and repopulated to EVERYWHERE. moon mining should then be allowed in HS too.
3) in light of what mechanisms planet PI uses, moon mining should also adopt similar mechanisms. moon goo runs a certain cycle before it runs out (maybe 4 weeks? 8 weeks?) then cosmic randomization occurs. its just like W-space, you dont really know where the next exit will pop out of. goo hunters need to rescan for new moon to mine the goo.
4) amount of base materials used to construct items in eve should require a rebalance.

if not otherwise, all that the changes thats been said is only because a certain group asks for it in their advantage but not necessarily for the good of the game and all players as a whole. then why therefore do we sub for a game that only changes mechanisms that will benefit a certain group of voices and not all?

WUT ???

KanashiiKami
#1983 - 2014-07-05 05:37:19 UTC  |  Edited by: KanashiiKami
Sigras wrote:
Khan'nikki wrote:
POS DEATH & DESTRUCTION

Congrats on the lifting of Standings for structures in Highsec Space! Score one for small biz.

Now next on the list -- taking care of the Moon Squatters. Folks that anchor and forget.

Here's an idea: Moon Starbases that are not powered up take long term damage (be it NPC pirates, meteorites or just plain bad space mojo) and ultimately die. Their shields go down and structures decay. Maybe they spawn some kind of site that can be salvaged, raided, scanned .. you're the Makers.

.. just make them go away!

This would take care of the windfall that some ppl expect from the 'Can I Haz your lootz' of hacking into abandoned labs and such, while providing more anchorable places.

Thanks for reading!

Or you could... You know... Use the mechanics available to you and war dec the Corp and knock their tower out yourself instead of asking CCP to do it for you.



what if ... goonwaffe or moar tears (or some commerce entity) deliberately setup POS squats using proxy corps and jams up entire systems? for their own economic advantage?

so similarly, by that few minutes of deployment, someone will need hours to rip it down. so the best suggestion to CCP is, if a tower is left unattended for over 6 hours, it should AUTO un-ANCHOR! like mobile depots ...

if the POS does not auto-un-anchors based on my version of mechanics then we know these peeps are active in their POS squats and they need to put in man power/hours to POS squat / re-arm them

i will like to HIGHLIGHT that devs should they themselves play as INDY for a few weeks or months before attempting to tweak or change things. as it is, a sandbox, we are playing a defective game and we just got used to it thats all. and we do get around to things we need to do eventually, and i think that is what bug fixers hope we do ... ignore bugs highlighted.

WUT ???

Sigras
Conglomo
#1984 - 2014-07-05 10:58:08 UTC
KanashiiKami wrote:
i think the game will truly become game changing if

1) POS now can truly be anchored anywhere, except for restricted zones like 100km away from stargates, from NPC stations, etc.

I sincerely hope you mean cant be posted on grid with stargates, NPC stations, etc. otherwise I would like to introduce you to large artillery batteries which have a 250 km range
KanashiiKami wrote:
2) since now bases can be anywhere, MOON GOO should also now be re-randomized and repopulated to EVERYWHERE. moon mining should then be allowed in HS too.

wow ... clearly you dont know how this game works... Within a month Goonswarm would lock up every moon thats valuable and anyone trying to stop them would simply get rofl-stompped by a billion RR sentry dominixs... taking out towers in high sec requires numbers that few can muster
KanashiiKami wrote:
3) in light of what mechanisms planet PI uses, moon mining should also adopt similar mechanisms. moon goo runs a certain cycle before it runs out (maybe 4 weeks? 8 weeks?) then cosmic randomization occurs. its just like W-space, you dont really know where the next exit will pop out of. goo hunters need to rescan for new moon to mine the goo.

You have obviously never used moon probes... try scanning a few thousand moon and then think about doing that every month... Also have you given any thought to what it would do to the market as people horde mats for the upcoming reshuffle? or you know... any thought into this idea at all?
KanashiiKami wrote:
4) amount of base materials used to construct items in eve should require a rebalance.

yeah because that wouldnt take a ridiculously long time Roll
KanashiiKami wrote:
if not otherwise, all that the changes thats been said is only because a certain group asks for it in their advantage but not necessarily for the good of the game and all players as a whole. then why therefore do we sub for a game that only changes mechanisms that will benefit a certain group of voices and not all?

I would respond to this if it were written in english...
Sigras
Conglomo
#1985 - 2014-07-05 11:01:42 UTC
KanashiiKami wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Khan'nikki wrote:
POS DEATH & DESTRUCTION

Congrats on the lifting of Standings for structures in Highsec Space! Score one for small biz.

Now next on the list -- taking care of the Moon Squatters. Folks that anchor and forget.

Here's an idea: Moon Starbases that are not powered up take long term damage (be it NPC pirates, meteorites or just plain bad space mojo) and ultimately die. Their shields go down and structures decay. Maybe they spawn some kind of site that can be salvaged, raided, scanned .. you're the Makers.

.. just make them go away!

This would take care of the windfall that some ppl expect from the 'Can I Haz your lootz' of hacking into abandoned labs and such, while providing more anchorable places.

Thanks for reading!

Or you could... You know... Use the mechanics available to you and war dec the Corp and knock their tower out yourself instead of asking CCP to do it for you.



what if ... goonwaffe or moar tears (or some commerce entity) deliberately setup POS squats using proxy corps and jams up entire systems? for their own economic advantage?

great... so they put up say 25 towers achieving full moon coverage with a proxy corp. This costs them about 2 billion ISK and leaves them with no defenders for the towers and no advantage as they're not onlining any of these towers... that seems like a great plan...
Flay Nardieu
#1986 - 2014-07-07 15:32:21 UTC
After 100+ pages and thousands of posts between several related threads I really hope CCP really reconsiders some of the intended changes.

Particularly...

  • Complete removal of empire standings to anchor a tower (an encroachment model is better, starting at .5)
  • Forcing BPOs to be at the POS (remote from office in same system works! so leave it be)
  • Requiring multiple labs/arrays to achieve optimal bonuses
  • Several other changes I've mentioned about a dozen times but don't feel like iterating again.


It would also be nice to make the graphical part of the new UI scalable to some degree, it takes up too much display real estate as is.

Also I've already noticed the placement of multiple idle towers in systems with ice belts by single corporations, none where from the big low or null alliances but it does show people are quite willing to squat to annoy those w/o standing req's placing in beneficial locations where the new compression arrays be of most use.
Zeera Tomb-Raider
Vega Farscape
#1987 - 2014-07-09 07:02:34 UTC
If i hade the choice betwin accepting all the changes in sirus or remowe it all,then trash it i say,thats hove bad som of this changes are to me.
Zuul Achura
Stampeding Beasts
#1988 - 2014-07-22 15:40:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Zuul Achura
Quote:

The damage per run mechanic has been removed from the game. This mainly affects R.A.M. and R.Db items
R.A.M. and R.Db requirements have been multiplied by 100 on all jobs that required them (mainly Tech II manufacturing and research)
All R.A.M. and R.Db blueprints now produce 100 more items for the same amount of materials
R.A.M. and R.Db volume has been divided by 100
Please refer to the "Building Better Worlds" Dev Blog for more details


Existing R.A.M. units a character owns were multiplied by 100?
If not, we lost 99% of their value/usability.
A job that used to require 0.75% now requires 75 units.
Kun'ii Zenya
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#1989 - 2014-09-02 05:10:48 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


The only way they will know is when they suddenly don't get perfect refine, and they lose half their mission loot, and they find out that building a Nestor from a BPC they ground LP for just shot up 200 M in cost, and that the cost of their T1 Raven Navy Issue just shot up 10 or 14% in price to buy, plus using an NPC station to build their ammo just went up a 1000 fold in cost, and they have to buy from the market instead.



Bzzt, wrong. Sellers always try to pass along the entire cost increases but the downward slopping nature of the demand curve with respect to price prevents this.

The effect of the increase in costs is thus a burden on both the buyer and the seller.

And that is only if people insist on using the most jammed up building slots. The 0-14% is a sliding scale and is dependent on how intensively the slots are used.

But no, lets simply assume the worst outcome is going to apply everywhere...well except NS where they wont face these kinds of added costs via some sort of elite PVP magic or some such.

Roll


Just checked, BTW, and the price of the Nestor from 3 months ago is down...alot! A whole ******* lot.

So much for Dinsdale and his predictions. Roll
First pagePrevious page9899100