These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Starbase changes for Crius

First post First post
Author
Rammix
TheMurk
#301 - 2014-06-21 17:20:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Rammix
Skalle Pande wrote:

Lovely. Ganker tears. "Boo-hooo, the POS can shoot back, CCP, make it so that carebears always lose, it's not fair that they might not lose.". Keep it coming, it is wonderful.

What you are really saing is "I want easy kills, not hard ones". Well, what kind of EVE pilot are you, then? Can't stand a risk? In that case go find some other li'l ol' lady and whack her from behind. If you want a fight, come get a fight.

Blabla.

You're not very clever, right?
Because I'm not a ganker. Never suicide killed anyone and never killed anyone in a HS war (if even have taken part in one, at all). Not sure if I even have a killmail in highsec.

Yet, I insist that carebears must suffer (in terms of safety, only). Doesn't matter if I'm a carebear myself ATM or not. If I get killed ratting in highsec - so be it, I accept it because in such case it's up to 90% my fault.

You want pos guns? Ok, no problem, spend 20-ish days to learn Anchoring 5 + Sb.D.M. for 3-5 characters. This would mean that you're taking your pos and its security seriously. But the coming change, which will let totally casual pos users who don't even want to invest some significant time in that, to be able to easily get several pos operator alts (even up to 100% characters in a corp, like 20/20, if they wish, very quickly) - it's bull****. And not only for highsec.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#302 - 2014-06-21 18:45:15 UTC
Rammix wrote:
Skalle Pande wrote:

Lovely. Ganker tears. "Boo-hooo, the POS can shoot back, CCP, make it so that carebears always lose, it's not fair that they might not lose.". Keep it coming, it is wonderful.

What you are really saing is "I want easy kills, not hard ones". Well, what kind of EVE pilot are you, then? Can't stand a risk? In that case go find some other li'l ol' lady and whack her from behind. If you want a fight, come get a fight.

Blabla.

You're not very clever, right?
Because I'm not a ganker. Never suicide killed anyone and never killed anyone in a HS war (if even have taken part in one, at all). Not sure if I even have a killmail in highsec.

Yet, I insist that carebears must suffer (in terms of safety, only). Doesn't matter if I'm a carebear myself ATM or not. If I get killed ratting in highsec - so be it, I accept it because in such case it's up to 90% my fault.

You want pos guns? Ok, no problem, spend 20-ish days to learn Anchoring 5 + Sb.D.M. for 3-5 characters. This would mean that you're taking your pos and its security seriously. But the coming change, which will let totally casual pos users who don't even want to invest some significant time in that, to be able to easily get several pos operator alts (even up to 100% characters in a corp, like 20/20, if they wish, very quickly) - it's bull****. And not only for highsec.



Execpt they lowered starbase defense to anchoring 4 already

Next arguement
Rammix
TheMurk
#303 - 2014-06-21 20:28:41 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:

Execpt they lowered starbase defense to anchoring 4 already

Not yet. But it's unlikely that they will change their (awful) plan about that, you're right.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#304 - 2014-06-21 20:49:41 UTC
Rammix wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:

Execpt they lowered starbase defense to anchoring 4 already

Not yet. But it's unlikely that they will change their (awful) plan about that, you're right.



Well, it has changed on sisi

It has been a change since like the day the 3rd or 4th original dev blog was released

No one has ever said anything about it negatively except "Can I haz skillpoints back"

If you are still doubting it goes live, I can't imagine what other **** you are paranoid about.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#305 - 2014-06-21 23:14:07 UTC
Rammix wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
someone wrote:
Timed restriction to anchor Control Towers

Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


Please dont do this, we will just be forced to make a lot of 1-alt corps to hop around to to avoid wardecs in the end nothing positive will come of it but it will be a headache for us all.

cowards who try to exploit their way out of wars deserve the headache

This. And the main axiom of eve: carebears must suffer.
If some patch lessens suffering of carebears (obviously I mean safety, not UI changes made only for comfort) - they're doing it wrong.

p.s. If a carebear does not accept this as a given and can't stand any risk - he is not the Eve type.


I was wardec about 2 weeks ago, made a new corp in 5 mins. There is NO RISK get it now!!

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maxx Run
Maxx Run Blueprint Services
#306 - 2014-06-22 01:41:16 UTC
Rammix wrote:
[quote=Skalle Pande]
Yet, I insist that carebears must suffer (in terms of safety, only). Doesn't matter if I'm a carebear myself ATM or not. If I get killed ratting in highsec - so be it, I accept it because in such case it's up to 90% my fault.


WTF are you talking about? Have you ever been in a corp war? Getting killed whilst ratting in high sec, you will accept it?

Getting killed in high sec is inexcusable. Why role over? There is no acceptable loss.

Don't be stoopid, please, other wise everyone will star going POS mad...

Yours hopefully,
Maxx

We sell high ME - Sub-Cap Ship, Mod, Rig and Ammo BPC's - All at great prices! The best in the game, we were genetically engineered for this work!!

Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#307 - 2014-06-22 03:15:18 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:

I'm sure now you are just a troll, your previous post about your 12 plex per month with 1 toon and a pos was a hint.
This response confirms it..

Either that or you have never used a pos and therefore have no idea how the coming changes will affect researching in one.



Average selection of ten of my top BPOs comes out to 1.4m isk/hr per line, running indefinitely since I can spread my product and not flood the markets. If someone else crashes one, two, hell all of those markets I can still tap others, and many many more at lower margins.

Let's do some basic math that you are incapable of doing alone.

1.4m isk per hour per line = 14m isk per hour per character.

There are 24 hours in a day.

There are ~30 days in a month (plex counts for 30d anyway).

That's 10.08b isk. That is 13.8 plexes at 730m each. This is not particularly difficult unless you are completely deficient at math. Hell, you don't even have to be good at math. There are programs that will do the math for you. All you have to do is put the right thing in the oven. Of course you seem too daft to even accomplish that, so I can understand how you would have difficulty earning a single plex per month.



Just to further rub this in your face: Even if you are literally scraping along on ammo BPOs you can get an average of 50k per hour per line... in station slots. That's half a plex per month dumping your ammo directly onto jita and doing what is literally considered peasantry for newbie characters. You are that bad at earning money. Congratulations.




PS: Do you still plan to store your entire BPO collection in a POS when you're using 1% of it? I'd like to siege you post-patch.

You don't know the difference between "Researching" & "Manufacturing" ?
Let me help, Manufacturing - You will have BPC's in a pos. Researching you will have BPO's in a pos.

Manufacturing pos's will be no more threatened than they are now (they will also, depending on where they are, be far less profitable than they are now)
Research pos, that would be one with LABS in it, will be a fine target to go after.

By all means keep living in your fantasy world of 10 bil profit PM per toon . Eve needs dreamers.



lol @ being too stupid to haul BPOs to a POS. I guess this is why you can't do math, either
Flay Nardieu
#308 - 2014-06-22 08:19:27 UTC
Over 90% of the expansion's projected content as given reeks, whole dynamic is ganked. Sadly I'd rather deal with the existing issues even the check boxes that sometimes do opposite of what you expect and dated interface.

So let me whip out the ole crystal ball (which is gonna be needed for every spreadsheet and planning program to function... where do you find an API to a mystical device that divines the future use at a system that could vary hour by hour and day by day?" Hmm... it shows many industrial and research types going solo, working with a corp would be too annoying not due to the corp's fault but the new and improved mechanics. Single use only (not by choice either) POSes cluttered with to dozens of the same lab or array type. A very enticing chance of misplacing prints (now where did I put the BPO is it in the office at this station maybe the station 3 systems over, maybe it is in the research POS, nope not there maybe it is in the manufacturing POS wait it isn't there either alright WTH is the print... maybe Bob has it, nah he swears he doesn't have it)

Ah savor the ever so sweet satire and not so subtle suffering of all who have to contend with this mess. Is it too late to rename the next release to Loki it seems much more in his arena?

However, not to be completely negative some things make perfect sense and couple would conditionally

  • Compression Array - It has tremendous potential for all security systems
  • Use prints from a container - Long over due
  • New UI - needs some major tweaking but the ability to see at a glance have vs need for a job is awesome


I'm sure there are maybe 2 or so I forgot, but most of it is absurd complexity where it need not exist. Complexity for flexibility and/or process control great, otherwise sorry back to the drawing board.
Rammix
TheMurk
#309 - 2014-06-22 09:07:28 UTC
Maxx Run wrote:
Rammix wrote:
[quote=Skalle Pande]
Yet, I insist that carebears must suffer (in terms of safety, only). Doesn't matter if I'm a carebear myself ATM or not. If I get killed ratting in highsec - so be it, I accept it because in such case it's up to 90% my fault.


WTF are you talking about? Have you ever been in a corp war? Getting killed whilst ratting in high sec, you will accept it?

Getting killed in high sec is inexcusable. Why role over? There is no acceptable loss.

Don't be stoopid, please, other wise everyone will star going POS mad...

Yours hopefully,
Maxx

You misinterpret me. I was saying that if I lose something then it's my own fault. Highsec is too safe already, so carebears should just accept some risks as a given instead of wishing for more and more safety.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Rammix
TheMurk
#310 - 2014-06-22 09:13:07 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
Rammix wrote:
Kenneth Feld wrote:

Execpt they lowered starbase defense to anchoring 4 already

Not yet. But it's unlikely that they will change their (awful) plan about that, you're right.



Well, it has changed on sisi

It has been a change since like the day the 3rd or 4th original dev blog was released

No one has ever said anything about it negatively except "Can I haz skillpoints back"

If you are still doubting it goes live, I can't imagine what other **** you are paranoid about.

Pos defense is getting potentially overpowered, okay, okay. It doesn't harm me, I just don't like tendencies to more safety, even the tiniest ones. Hope I made that clear now, at last.

The skillpoints, sure, I too would like to get them back.

Maldiro Selkurk wrote:

There is NO RISK get it now!!

And that is BAD.

OpenSUSE Leap 42.1, wine >1.9

Covert cyno in highsec: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=296129&find=unread

Captain Davy
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#311 - 2014-06-23 14:36:18 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Why there is a need for anchoring/onlining/whatever whole bunch of arrays instead of just having single production array with configurable number of whatever it is array does right now? Wouldn't it be simpler for both devs AND players? Since you already messing around those things anyway...


Please listen to this guy! do something similar to what we have on PI.
Captain Davy
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2014-06-23 14:44:43 UTC
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:
I still stand by my opinion that the idea of having multiple arrays of the same type in a POS is a real bodge job method to give additional bonuses.

A far better idea would be to have new skill/s that have to be learnt, maybe at 10x skill time if you like, to give tax bonuses at POSes. A reply from CCP is to why this is not a better idea would be nice too.


I dont think the skill approach would be the best option but i agree with you, anchoring dozens of unessesary modules in a pos is just stupid.

i think the whay it should be handled is similar to command centers in a PI, u can just "upgrade" you array for X isk, that would increase the PG/CPU usage by Y/Z.

after "purchacing" that upgrade to a given module you could downgrade and upgrade to that same lvl instantly and for free so u can manage in a easy way that stuff.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#313 - 2014-06-23 17:23:27 UTC
Flay Nardieu wrote:
where do you find an API to a mystical device that divines the future use at a system that could vary hour by hour and day by day?"


Day by day, only. And not significantly, as it's based on a 28 day moving average, which will smooth out most bumps.

(Other than teams coming online. I guess that can happen during a day. But it's not a particularly frequent action.)


Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#314 - 2014-06-23 17:24:52 UTC
Captain Davy wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Why there is a need for anchoring/onlining/whatever whole bunch of arrays instead of just having single production array with configurable number of whatever it is array does right now? Wouldn't it be simpler for both devs AND players? Since you already messing around those things anyway...


Please listen to this guy! do something similar to what we have on PI.



'Simpler'

Bring in a bunch of new code to manage the upgrades of a new array.

Or just count the other arrays nearby.

(yes, I'm not hugely happy with the current option. But it's a starting place)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Brutalis Furia
Hammer and Anvil Industries
#315 - 2014-06-23 18:01:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Brutalis Furia
Coming to this discussion late, but...

If the walls between regions are starting to come down (in a VERY small way now), I could see (and would personally like) skills that are currently limited by jump range to be based on light years instead.

I also can't resist chiming in on the Hisec Safety argument. (at my own risk, admittedly)

Highsec should be safe. It should be risk free under normal conditions. It also should be limited in its economic value.

CCP is increasing what you can do in highsec and thus increasing its economic value, and if this were the only place this was happening, I'd have a problem with it.

But it's not.

CCP is buffing industry globally. they're increasing options and streamlining the process everywhere. They have even said that they're planning on looking closely at nullsec industry and its specific challenges.

So to both sides of this argument, in this thread, I say that your view is too narrow. Look at the larger picture.
Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#316 - 2014-06-23 20:55:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
someone wrote:
Timed restriction to anchor Control Towers

Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


Please dont do this, we will just be forced to make a lot of 1-alt corps to hop around to to avoid wardecs in the end nothing positive will come of it but it will be a headache for us all.


Rammix wrote:
This. And the main axiom of eve: carebears must suffer.
If some patch lessens suffering of carebears (obviously I mean safety, not UI changes made only for comfort) - they're doing it wrong.

p.s. If a carebear does not accept this as a given and can't stand any risk - he is not the Eve type.


maldiro selkurk wrote:
I was wardec about 2 weeks ago, made a new corp in 5 mins. There is NO RISK get it now!!


Rammix wrote:
And that is BAD.


Thank GOD it only took you a page and a half of off-point forum blathering to finally agree with me, this idea is BAD and shouldnt be put into the game in its current suggested form.

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Maldiro Selkurk
Radiation Sickness
#317 - 2014-06-23 22:20:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldiro Selkurk
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:
someone wrote:
Timed restriction to anchor Control Towers

Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


Please dont do this, we will just be forced to make a lot of 1-alt corps to hop around to to avoid wardecs in the end nothing positive will come of it but it will be a headache for us all.

cowards who try to exploit their way out of wars deserve the headache


Exploit, it's a game mechanic. Sorta like distracting the local defense forces then blasting every ship docking and undocking from Jita. (the only difference is that I accept the mechanic of burn jita while you prefer to whine about wardec hopping)

Yawn,  I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.

Kickaha Neesha
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#318 - 2014-06-25 01:58:15 UTC
So, let me see if I understand this correctly. CCP doesn't like it when a corp has a POS that performs multiple functions, Research, Component and Module construction. So in order to be cost effective I'm going to need to spam my POS's with multiple arrays of the same type across 3 different POS's now.

CCP, can you give a list of pilot activities that you wish to curtail in the future (as you did with the datacores) so that I don't choose the wrong skillsets to learn?
Circumstantial Evidence
#319 - 2014-06-25 22:19:10 UTC
As I understand it - providing a benefit to multiple arrays of the same type is an effort to preserve the value players have invested in multiple arrays already. The value obtained from multiple industry slots at a POS is difficult to equate to the value of a percentage saved on manufacture and research. But If there's no reason to have more than one array, their market values would crash as players dump extra ones.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#320 - 2014-06-26 12:45:24 UTC
Brutalis Furia wrote:
Coming to this discussion late, but...



CCP is buffing industry globally. they're increasing options and streamlining the process everywhere. They have even said that they're planning on looking closely at nullsec industry and its specific challenges.

So to both sides of this argument, in this thread, I say that your view is too narrow. Look at the larger picture.

The larger picture -
"Increasing options" yes everything will be far more complex than it currently is due to the additional options.
"Streamlining" and "Increasing options" is somewhat a contradiction - Increased options is not streamlining, it creates complexity. In this case a lot of unnecessary complexity and randomness.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.