These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Long-Distance Travel Changes Inbound

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nazri al Mahdi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4841 - 2014-10-03 02:56:18 UTC
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

I and most of the people here and elsewhere are going option C: rage against a game-breaking change that cuts off a large percentage of space from trade and will crush the EVE economy, in the hopes of saving CCP from itself.

The capital nerf is needed. JF nerf is premature at best - it can only come after far off nullsec regions get resource independence.

If you think this change is game-breaking or that you're saving CCP from itself, you're part of the problem - a playerbase that wants things fixed as long as it only impacts everyone else. The problem isn't that it will be harder to get your supplies; its excessive demand. You said it yourself 'it's more fun with T2'. That is your problem. You also said "I'm entitled...". You aren't. Excessive ease of transport from highsec is part of the reason null isn't self sufficient. There's no need to be. You just don't want to have to understand the game or adapt. You're therefore falling back on the standard of self-centered players f pretending there's a unified base of "most" people that agree with you (there isn't; its confirmation bias) and pretending CCP doesn't understand.

They do - better than you.


In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.
Ukiah Oregan
Lithomancers
#4842 - 2014-10-03 02:57:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Ukiah Oregan
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
[

Regionalization needs to be all-encompasing.



Personally I would rather see individual system localization become possible

With out local 0.0 systems being self sustaining before Nerfing the ability to sustain life in a localized situation seems counter-intuitive and anti-game play

Many of the folks who are having issue with this proposal do support the idea that 0.0 needs to be revamped in some way.

The argument is what is the best way and how should it be implemented?

Its the idea that CCP is willing to NERF the current life line out of the box with not ONE but TWO new TIMERS!

Maybe CCP should consider providing an alternative life line mechanic before the CAP Jump Nerf occurs to make the CAP Jump Nerf make sense and consider doing it in a way that uses a logical that actually fits into the current game play
Aloh
Migrant-Fleet
#4843 - 2014-10-03 02:59:28 UTC
Summer Isle wrote:
Aloh wrote:
Limiting the amount of SOV that can be held by a corp based on activity would only hurt the big SOV alliances not the small corps/alliances trying to break into SOV.

Limiting the amount of Sov a corp or alliance can hold would be meaningless, and would hurt the smaller players more than the larger, as the larger can more-readily break their group into numerous smaller groups, while still acting as a singular entity.

The larger groups have the logistics and tools to accomplish this. The smaller groups rarely do.


No it wouldn't I covered that go back and reread.
If each corp could hold say.... 5 systems max on activity even the CFC would be hard put to hold an entire region.
Activity eliminates the power of alts.
So you have to be active in all your systems to keep them.
smokeydapot
Moon Of The Pheonix
#4844 - 2014-10-03 03:00:50 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
smokeydapot wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
You can call me a liar all you want, but that is my transport need, regardless of the arguments you want to make about it. And I'm just a small corp.

EDIT: we already mine like crazy.

Why the f*ck do you NEED to move 1 million m3 to null, per week?

By m3, t2 mats represent a tiny portion of any build. Take the Golem for example, requires a sh*t ton of mats to build, but only ~3000 m3 worth of t2 mats. Each blockade runner can carry enough T2 materials to build 3 T2 Battleships with room to spare.

Fuel blocks for towers? Use the ice from your local ice belts.



I'm sure that would be an option to use local ice for towers if they wasn't in more need of attention than jump drives.

POS balancing would be much higher on my list than this idea.

Eh, you can import enough fuel via blops+blockade runner (or god forbid a freighter op if you're one of the larger entities) to provide for modest use of your off racial caps.

The fact that getting off-racial fuel for a given region will be harder is honestly much more of an upside than a downside imo. Good luck dropping archons on everything that moves if there's no Amarr ice in your home region. Cool



I was actually thinking caldari ice for all the reaction towers all over eve because they are the only towers with enough CPU to get the job done but your little troll ass can't see the full picture can it.

Get back under your bridge.
Joey Zasa
Swamp Panthers
SONS of BANE
#4845 - 2014-10-03 03:01:36 UTC
smokeydapot wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


...

Big thanks to the whole CSM for their help with this process so far and the good work I know they'll continue to do as we consult with them going forward.

...



Mouth so full of lies!

READ: The Mittani: CSM Criticizes CCP



Mike Azariah wrote:
for the record: when I moved out of null it was in a carrier. that ain't gonna happen again, is it?

m


Lets see if the devs can communicate with the CSM first no wonder this threadnaught has hit a near epic level of rage not to mention lies from devs yet again.
]



your a renter....stop
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4846 - 2014-10-03 03:03:43 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Quote:
but dicking around with the purpose of CSM to create a 'cover' for a planned feature change is a giant middle finger to the entire community AND the very reasons that CSM was created in the first place.


The only people dicking around with the purpose of the csm are the choad warriors the bloc monkeys voted onto the csm.



If your going to quote me, please at least include my name please? :)

Again not partisan, just thinking that elections were free and fair - and while there's nothing wrong with having disdain for partisan politicians in CSM, there's also nothing wrong with it either - just a group of people with common cause getting someone elected.

Happens in every western democracy all the time.

So unless your an anarchist? shouldn't be all that big of a deal.

And regarding NDA - NDA should always be followed, UNLESS, CCP is getting tyrannical - and then **** the NDA! I'm all for CSM going all Edward Snowden on CCP every time!

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kiryen O'Bannon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#4847 - 2014-10-03 03:04:33 UTC
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.

Everything in the game is affecting everything else. Your easy logistics are part of the cause of null stagnation, causing boredom and frusteration for thousands.

You are not entitled to any gameplay otber than whats is provided. We are all paying customers. Ypu are entitled only to the access you paid for. Your level of enjoyment is your problem. You are welcome to play any other game of your choice.

Eternal Father, King of birth, /Who didst create the heaven and earth, /And bid the planets and the sun/ Their own appointed orbits run; /O hear us when we seek thy grace /For those who soar through outer space.
Polo Marco
Four Winds
#4848 - 2014-10-03 03:05:50 UTC
Aloh wrote:
Summer Isle wrote:
Aloh wrote:
Limiting the amount of SOV that can be held by a corp based on activity would only hurt the big SOV alliances not the small corps/alliances trying to break into SOV.

Limiting the amount of Sov a corp or alliance can hold would be meaningless, and would hurt the smaller players more than the larger, as the larger can more-readily break their group into numerous smaller groups, while still acting as a singular entity.

The larger groups have the logistics and tools to accomplish this. The smaller groups rarely do.


No it wouldn't I covered that go back and reread.
If each corp could hold say.... 5 systems max on activity even the CFC would be hard put to hold an entire region.
Activity eliminates the power of alts.
So you have to be active in all your systems to keep them.



Aloh, did you read this?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5078735#post5078735

Eve teaches hard lessons. Don't blame the game for your own failures.
Nazri al Mahdi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4849 - 2014-10-03 03:06:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Nazri al Mahdi
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.

Everything in the game is affecting everything else. Your easy logistics are part of the cause of null stagnation, causing boredom and frusteration for thousands.

You are not entitled to any gameplay otber than whats is provided. We are all paying customers. Ypu are entitled only to the access you paid for. Your level of enjoyment is your problem. You are welcome to play any other game of your choice.


Thank you, Kiryen. The obvious escaped me and the many who have posted screenshots in this thread of their unsubscribed accounts.

Also, way to stand up for boring games. Fight the power!
Phangan
Perkone
Caldari State
#4850 - 2014-10-03 03:07:58 UTC
Ok so I have thought of a quite novel idea to get around the logistics been absolute **** after these changes have been made - could be applied to corporation moves also that rely heavily on multiple carrier jumps back and forth for moving ships from point A <> B.

Basically its a Jump plan.

  • Whereby at a period before your making your jump you create a time window X hours in advanced, most logistics would be able to plan their jumps day(s) in advanced for their normal route that they would take.
  • 24 hours notice will give you a 1 hour period where by jumping in and out of the pre-defined locations does not increase your fatigue by more than 5 minutes or whatever CCP deem appropriate.


This IMO would solve having logistics and moving between systems - solve logistics issues that go on a daily basis at the same times. Could even publish these planned jumps so that everyone can see what his happening with larger corp / aliance moves to that the enemy could even re-act, thus more battles / skirmishes?

I guess the downside to this is could be abused - what if you didn't jump though the route that you planned ?? More heavily penalties for not jumping. Maybe attach a money sink rather than fuel for using this service and penalties for not using the pre-allocated jump plan.

This is me spit balling - I just bought myself an Archon the day before this was released. Now I want to offload this peice of junk cause as it stands I would only otherwise be ratting in it - I wont be moving it any time soon after these have been released. Even just getting it from where I purchased it from to my home system now would have taken me 4 jumps. After these changes would have taken me over 9 jumps (without using gates) and through some very un-friendly space and dont get me started a jump that would take 50 minutes (+ self scouting) would now take a day worth of sitting doing no pew pew to move my fresh cap.
Joey Zasa
Swamp Panthers
SONS of BANE
#4851 - 2014-10-03 03:09:16 UTC
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.

Everything in the game is affecting everything else. Your easy logistics are part of the cause of null stagnation, causing boredom and frusteration for thousands.

You are not entitled to any gameplay otber than whats is provided. We are all paying customers. Ypu are entitled only to the access you paid for. Your level of enjoyment is your problem. You are welcome to play any other game of your choice.


Thank you, Kiryen. The obvious escaped me and the many who have posted screenshots in this thread of their unsubscribed accounts.

Also, way to stand up for boring games. Fight the power!



REAL MEN BIOMASS!!!!!
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4852 - 2014-10-03 03:11:36 UTC
smokeydapot wrote:
Lets see if the devs can communicate with the CSM first no wonder this threadnaught has hit a near epic level of rage not to mention lies from devs yet again.

Well, this thread is 60% lazy entitled nullbears screaming their heads off that the changes will work exactly as CCP intends, 35% folks like me telling them to HTFU and adapt this is EVE ffs not WoW, and 5% folks interested in the nitty gritty of the mechanics.

Sounds like their goal of identifying edge cases and getting solid feedback from the community is working as intended - just like these changes likely will.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Ukiah Oregan
Lithomancers
#4853 - 2014-10-03 03:11:44 UTC
Summer Isle wrote:

Sadly, to my knowledge, no such system exists anywhere in EVE (if one does, please point it out to me!)


support an active 100 man corp or 500 man alliance in this system

Cloudring: XT-R36

http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/XT-R36/stats

the question isn't can a single a EVE Pilot support him/her self in a single 0.0 system

try to support 50 active EVE pilots in this one system simultaneously (day in / day out 23/7)
.....where they can't leave
.....they can't jump,
.....all industry and trade is done through a POS, no station, no market
.....no worm hole profits to promise them
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#4854 - 2014-10-03 03:11:52 UTC
Aloh wrote:
CCP why are you working so hard at keeping me from playing the game?

If you read the Mittani you'll know that they are going to add a bunch of Null 0.0 systems that will make your logistics burden much easier. So if I were you guys I'd start suggesting some new regions like a Null 0.0 region that is between Querious and Catch and connects low sec to Stain. Tell them to make it low sec so that it'll be easier to get your JF's and blockade runners through. Lots of stations in each system (harder to camp a single station), with factories.




Aloh
Migrant-Fleet
#4855 - 2014-10-03 03:12:04 UTC
Polo Marco wrote:
Aloh, did you read this?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5078735#post5078735



Similar idea but different mechanic not entirely happy with it but it would be tons better then the
ideas CCP has ATM. Lets just hope they listen this time.

* I know I am an optimist, I still think there is hope for humankind.
smokeydapot
Moon Of The Pheonix
#4856 - 2014-10-03 03:12:11 UTC
Joey Zasa wrote:
smokeydapot wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


...

Big thanks to the whole CSM for their help with this process so far and the good work I know they'll continue to do as we consult with them going forward.

...



Mouth so full of lies!

READ: The Mittani: CSM Criticizes CCP



Mike Azariah wrote:
for the record: when I moved out of null it was in a carrier. that ain't gonna happen again, is it?

m


Lets see if the devs can communicate with the CSM first no wonder this threadnaught has hit a near epic level of rage not to mention lies from devs yet again.
]



your a renter....stop



And your corp likes bat phones of triple A your point being what ???
Nazri al Mahdi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#4857 - 2014-10-03 03:12:57 UTC
Joey Zasa wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.

Everything in the game is affecting everything else. Your easy logistics are part of the cause of null stagnation, causing boredom and frusteration for thousands.

You are not entitled to any gameplay otber than whats is provided. We are all paying customers. Ypu are entitled only to the access you paid for. Your level of enjoyment is your problem. You are welcome to play any other game of your choice.


Thank you, Kiryen. The obvious escaped me and the many who have posted screenshots in this thread of their unsubscribed accounts.

Also, way to stand up for boring games. Fight the power!



REAL MEN BIOMASS!!!!!

Ladies first, after you, I insist.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4858 - 2014-10-03 03:14:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Veskrashen
smokeydapot wrote:
I was actually thinking caldari ice for all the reaction towers all over eve because they are the only towers with enough CPU to get the job done but your little troll ass can't see the full picture can it.

Get back under your bridge.

Oh please. You can fit 1600 hours worth of fuel for large Caldari towers in one JF load. Quit your whining already.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."
Operative X10-4
Doomheim
#4859 - 2014-10-03 03:14:47 UTC
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
Joey Zasa wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
Kiryen O'Bannon wrote:
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:

In context, I was claiming I was entitled not to be bored to death by a game. You and CCP are free to make your own life choices if you disagree with that simple statement. The fact of the matter is I am a subscribing game customer and am entitled to not be bored to death by their product.

Everything in the game is affecting everything else. Your easy logistics are part of the cause of null stagnation, causing boredom and frusteration for thousands.

You are not entitled to any gameplay otber than whats is provided. We are all paying customers. Ypu are entitled only to the access you paid for. Your level of enjoyment is your problem. You are welcome to play any other game of your choice.


Thank you, Kiryen. The obvious escaped me and the many who have posted screenshots in this thread of their unsubscribed accounts.

Also, way to stand up for boring games. Fight the power!



REAL MEN BIOMASS!!!!!

Ladies first, after you, I insist.


Spoiled kids... just press undo cancel subscription after you screenshot that...
BIOMASS BRO!!

FOREVER PIRATE 07 FLY DANGEROUSLY.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4860 - 2014-10-03 03:15:23 UTC
Nazri al Mahdi wrote:
Joey Zasa wrote:

REAL MEN BIOMASS!!!!!

Ladies first, after you, I insist.

We like the changes as is, and think the game will be better when they're implemented.

It's folks like you who refuse to adapt that need to consider ending the misery their logistics burden will impose.

Can I have your stuff? I don't mind the trip.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."