These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Jump Drive Isotope Consumption

First post First post First post
Author
MissBolyai
ElitistOps
Snuffed Out
#141 - 2014-04-29 15:26:42 UTC
Thanks for clearing those scrub posts... Now fozzie can focus on my post :)
Shonion
FREE GATES
FREE GATES COALITION
#142 - 2014-04-29 15:27:43 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


The goals of this change are:
  • Stimulate the isotope (and therefore ice) market to help cushion any drop in demand from players using smaller starbases after the science and industry slot changes.

  • Wouldn't be better to wait till one change takes effect then change another thing. I simply not beleive that this change will effect isotope usage that much, because ppl will put up other towers in high sec, maybe not for runing research or manufacturing jobs, but for run compression modules for their miners. Even that, the demand of isotopes already pushed the prices up, because that well planned. This going to skyrocket it.

    CCP Fozzie wrote:


  • Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec.

  • After CCP nerfed ice mining at all with limits (witch not definetly bad), then you expect with the summer changes to force ppl to build up industry and market in 0.0 you instantly hit it with heavily increasing the transporting costs. You should know that 0.0 regions don't have everything in local to run any decent manufacturing, build T2 or just live there, you have to import several materials for example 3 of 4 isotopes usually. Regions has limited resources, some kind of moons are not exist in several regions.

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
  • Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection, it should at least provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often.

  • Its just simply makes the newbros life harder, market more expensive and industry less profitable in 0.0.

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals.

    To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.



    If its about nerfing force projections, then some other ideas would be much better then this. Simply reduce jump ranges or give a cooldown to jump drives, but this is only impact prices and eve slowly forced to a hyperinflation when lot of ppl just get off and go play something else. Changing shipbalance can make a few bad nights for some ppl, but changing the economy to wrong way, can collapse the game.

    Actually agree with MissBolyai, at this point i have no idea what is the motivation of this announcement.


    But we will have shiny skins, yaaay... -.-
    Zomgnomnom
    Origin.
    Fraternity.
    #143 - 2014-04-29 15:28:18 UTC
    Apollo Purvon wrote:
    You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem.



    THIS.
    David Magnus
    #144 - 2014-04-29 15:28:58 UTC
    Wow, where did all that useful data go?
    I wasn't done copying it into Excel :(

    http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/fight-us-maybe

    http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/winterupdate

    http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/supercaps

    http://soundcloud.com/davidkmagnus/pandemiclegion

    Lyn Fel
    Black Frog Logistics
    Red-Frog
    #145 - 2014-04-29 15:30:49 UTC
    This is unfortunate news and we will likely see an increase in Black Frog pricing this summer as a result to compensate.
    TheMercenaryKing
    Ultimatum.
    #146 - 2014-04-29 15:31:58 UTC  |  Edited by: TheMercenaryKing
    Stimulating Iso and Competitiveness:
    Reduce the Heavy water and LO output of Dark Glitter (more profitable than Ore). No one mines the Isotope ore in null BECAUSE IT IS CHEAP.



    "Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection, it should at least provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often."

    No, it wont. Not at all. It will hurt smaller groups but larger ones wont give a ****. If they are moving capitals then they should expect to lose one or two. that is EVERYTHING compared to the cost of moving them.
    Michael Harari
    Genos Occidere
    HYDRA RELOADED
    #147 - 2014-04-29 15:32:12 UTC
    Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter.

    Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates.


    If the cost per ship were locked at what it costs to move a bs (or more like 3-4x that), the costs would be much more reasonable.
    James Messina
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #148 - 2014-04-29 15:32:53 UTC
    Literally stop nerfing every nice thing in the game. making it harder for players to make isk, while trying to drive up the cost of fuel. Instead of nerfing existing mechanics, why not just add new content? We are getting tired of the good things in this game being taken away one patch at a time.
    Powers Sa
    #149 - 2014-04-29 15:33:21 UTC
    Capqu wrote:
    i wish you'd stop trying to apply band-aid fixes to power projection and address the actual issues tho

    What issues?

    Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?https://eveninggames.net/register/ref/dQddmNgyLhFBqNJk

    Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.

    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #150 - 2014-04-29 15:33:39 UTC
    so this change is geared toward making Jump freighters more expensive too use?

    will this small price change stop them coming too jita?

    is this also a slight cost nerf to Black ops?

    and do you have any plans on actually dealing with power projection on an actual large scale?

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

    Querns
    GoonWaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #151 - 2014-04-29 15:33:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
    A later post pointed out that this concern had been seen and the suggestion taken. Thanks!

    I guess now is a good time to restate my concern without it being buried in a veritable font of autism.

    The current proposed changes suggest that a fuel consumption increase is coming to Jump Bridges. Jump bridges use Liquid Ozone (LO3) as fuel. Similar changes to uses of isotopes are being mollified by a decrease in their volume. Due to LO3's additional uses, modifying its volume is not advisable. Can the Jump Bridge pos module have its capacity increased to compensate for the increased LO3 usage?

    This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

    Varg Altol
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #152 - 2014-04-29 15:34:06 UTC
    Resgo wrote:
    Rather than increasing the size of fuel bays, why not cut the volume of the isotyopes by a third. Then it would carry through all of your systems using the isotopes at fuel. It wouldn't have an impact on POSes as POSes consume fuel blocks that would stay the same size.


    Perfect. Give this man a job
    ElectronHerd Askulf
    Aridia Logistical Misdirection
    #153 - 2014-04-29 15:34:11 UTC
    CCP Fozzie wrote:

  • Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec.

  • The problem here is that not everything necessary to production can be gathered in any given locale - there are always moongoos that must be imported. Also, because it's trivial to outproduce a local null market (even the more robust markets), product must be exported. This combination already disincents null industry. Higher jump freight costs hurt, they don't help

    Michael Harari
    Genos Occidere
    HYDRA RELOADED
    #154 - 2014-04-29 15:35:31 UTC
    Powers Sa wrote:
    Capqu wrote:
    i wish you'd stop trying to apply band-aid fixes to power projection and address the actual issues tho

    What issues?


    That the biggest ships in the game are also the fastest, and that moving around large fleets without taking the time or effort to use gates is basically free.

    There are many corps that use bridging as a replacement for roaming. You just autopilot your bait around, and when you hear shield alarm you have everyone tab back to eve, and light the cyno. Its promoting mostly afk gameplay, and reduces the risk with moving fleets dramatically.
    Powers Sa
    #155 - 2014-04-29 15:36:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Powers Sa
    Michael Harari wrote:
    Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter.

    Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates.

    Get all the way out. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. How do I move harpy/hawk/wolf fleets now?

    Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?https://eveninggames.net/register/ref/dQddmNgyLhFBqNJk

    Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.

    TigerXtrm
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #156 - 2014-04-29 15:36:15 UTC
    Damn you must really really REALLY want null-sec to keep their industry local huh?

    My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

    My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums

    Michael Harari
    Genos Occidere
    HYDRA RELOADED
    #157 - 2014-04-29 15:36:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
    Powers Sa wrote:
    Michael Harari wrote:
    Bridging a 100 man bc gang at max range is ~ 4m. A typical bc might carry that much just in ammo and nanite. Bridging a jump freighter is half the cost of jumping the same jump freighter.

    Bridging around 100 frigates costs 280k isk in topes. This is completely backwards - bridging should encourage movement of strategic fleets, and be punitively expensive for moving a bunch of lolfrigates around just because you dont want to take the risk and effort of using jumpgates.

    Get all the way out. That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.


    The cost of bridging large fleets shouldnt be basically a rounding error in most people's personal wallets. Bridging for strategic uses - fine. But when it starts becoming a replacement for roaming, it should be obvious the cost is way out of whack.

    And bridging jump capable ships definitely shouldnt cost less than jumping the same ships.
    Antoine Jordan
    Garoun Investment Bank
    Gallente Federation
    #158 - 2014-04-29 15:38:54 UTC
    Querns wrote:
    I guess now is a good time to restate my concern without it being buried in a veritable font of autism.

    The current proposed changes suggest that a fuel consumption increase is coming to Jump Bridges. Jump bridges use Liquid Ozone (LO3) as fuel. Similar changes to uses of isotopes are being mollified by a decrease in their volume. Due to LO3's additional uses, modifying its volume is not advisable. Can the Jump Bridge pos module have its capacity increased to compensate for the increased LO3 usage?

    this was added in at some point:
    "The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing."
    Lady Isabell
    Ministry of War
    Amarr Empire
    #159 - 2014-04-29 15:39:44 UTC
    Apollo Purvon wrote:
    You expect highsec ice consumption to drop on the theory that people will downsize their towers, ignoring the idea that more people will drop towers because you're also removing standings requirements and giving bonuses to tower manufacturing. In order to offset this drop in Highsec consumption, you're increasing nullsec logistics costs. This is a bad fix based on a non-existent problem.


    ^^

    Also if you really wanted to impact fuel (isotopes) for towers you could:

    Increase isotopes needed to produce fuel blocks (from 400 to 500 maybe?)


    This would impact towers directly that you are trying(??) to change without effecting logistics/jump drives/portals as much.
    Querns
    GoonWaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #160 - 2014-04-29 15:39:48 UTC
    Antoine Jordan wrote:
    Querns wrote:
    I guess now is a good time to restate my concern without it being buried in a veritable font of autism.

    The current proposed changes suggest that a fuel consumption increase is coming to Jump Bridges. Jump bridges use Liquid Ozone (LO3) as fuel. Similar changes to uses of isotopes are being mollified by a decrease in their volume. Due to LO3's additional uses, modifying its volume is not advisable. Can the Jump Bridge pos module have its capacity increased to compensate for the increased LO3 usage?

    this was added in at some point:
    "The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing."

    Oh, hey, good eye. I didn't notice that. My concern is withdrawn!

    This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.