These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CSM X - What are you voting for?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenshae Chiroptera
#281 - 2015-02-28 03:56:43 UTC
Sibyyl wrote:
In the "don't care if I lose it" space, I think Retty's are good for ice and the Ventures for gas.
... but it has two lasers! It must be better!
Like those battle ships! They are bigger and must be stronger! Hold on while I fill one with T1 modules.

Point being counter intuitive designs and newbie traps.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#282 - 2015-02-28 04:55:17 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Ventures are cheaper P


All of ours were fitted for the more profitable job of sucking gas. P

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Jenshae Chiroptera
#283 - 2015-02-28 15:07:36 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Ventures are cheaper P
All of ours were fitted for the more profitable job of sucking gas. P
WHAT!? How DARE you not use a Prospect! Did you miss my decree that these must be used for gas and worm holes?!

P

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Candi LeMew
Division 13
#284 - 2015-02-28 16:36:17 UTC
You got our votes Jen, right next to corbexx across all my accounts.

Good luck and thank you for raising your hand, regardless of the result. Smile

Keeping limbs crossed for you!

🍌

Remember... in Anoikis Bob Is Always Watching...

"I been kicked out of better homes than this" - Rick James
Jenshae Chiroptera
#285 - 2015-02-28 17:17:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Candi LeMew wrote:
You got our votes Jen, right next to corbexx across all my accounts.
Good luck and thank you for raising your hand, regardless of the result. Smile
Keeping limbs crossed for you!
Much appreciated!
Which type of sun are you using for that sun tanning? BlinkP
(Referencing a silly out of pod post)

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#286 - 2015-02-28 18:22:46 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Ventures are cheaper P
All of ours were fitted for the more profitable job of sucking gas. P
WHAT!? How DARE you not use a Prospect! Did you miss my decree that these must be used for gas and worm holes?!

P


Hard to use a ship that doesn't exist yet. P

Besides, we fit ours with surprise tackle, because it's fun to turn the tables on people. But that means that a fair number of them blew up.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Jenshae Chiroptera
#287 - 2015-03-01 00:00:39 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Ventures are cheaper P
All of ours were fitted for the more profitable job of sucking gas. P
WHAT!? How DARE you not use a Prospect! Did you miss my decree that these must be used for gas and worm holes?!
P
Hard to use a ship that doesn't exist yet. P
Besides, we fit ours with surprise tackle, because it's fun to turn the tables on people. But that means that a fair number of them blew up.
You haven't invented time travel yet?! P

Opened a thread to discuss mining in general and Low Sec.
TL;DR - "Dock or die" vs "stand and fight" playstyles.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jinrai Tremaine
Cheese It Inc
#288 - 2015-03-01 00:10:53 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

I think the scaling on the ships are all wrong. I would like to see :

Tank go up:
Procurer --> Covetor
Skiff ---> Hulk

Ore Hold go down:
Procurer (at retriever levels) --> Covetor
Skiff (at Mackinaw levels) --> Hulk

Ore Hold go up:
Barge --> Exhumer

Align time go down:
Procurer --> Covetor
Skiff ---> Hulk
Barge --> Exhumer

Acceleration to warp go down:
Procurer --> Covetor
Skiff ---> Hulk
Barge --> Exhumer

Yield go up:
Procurer --> Covetor
Skiff ---> Hulk
Barge --> Exhumer

This would make Procurers cheap, nimble ships that are reasonable (mostly as they are now)
While Hulks would have a decent yield to be worth the risk, large tanks but slow, so they would need support. Anyone solo mining in one would be a fool.


From a hisec mining perspective, this would basically eliminate the Skiff completely. As we've seen from both the big Odyssey change and the smaller Kronos revisit, hisec as a whole only cares about 1) tank and 2) yield, in that order. Putting the Hulk as the best in both those categories would make it the go-to any time there was a hauler around (not to mention opportunists either jetcan mining or mining into a freight container). Agility and speed just rarely matter in hisec, because being surrounded by neutrals all the time makes it a lot harder to pre-emptively warp before threats land.

Outside of hisec, and into the realm of speculation, I suspect that rather than having Procs/Skiffs take a niche as ninja miners, they simply won't be used in favour of using better mining ships fitted with Higgs rigs that are permanently aligned. Align time/warp acceleration don't mean anything when you're always two clicks away from entering warp, especially when the non-Proc/Skiff ships bring both better tank AND better yield to the party.

Finally, I'm not so sure that "Anyone solo mining in [a Hulk] would be a fool"; If I were a solo miner in nullsec I would definitely use your improved hulk, I'd simply use jetcans as an external ore bay rather than warping it back to station every few minutes. When a couple of cans are full, or when hostiles are reported in intel anywhere nearby, just park the Hulk in a POS/station, grab a cloak+mwd Miasmos and clear out the cans. You get the benefits of strong tank (vs the nullsec belt rats) and high yield and you mostly sidestep the issue of the small ore hold.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#289 - 2015-03-01 00:16:12 UTC
What if the differences are as pronounced as between Cruisers (Proc & Skiff), Battle Cruisers (Mack & Ret) and Battle Ships (Cov & Hulk)?

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
#290 - 2015-03-01 09:38:48 UTC
Jinrai Tremaine
Cheese It Inc
#291 - 2015-03-01 10:18:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
What if the differences are as pronounced as between Cruisers (Proc & Skiff), Battle Cruisers (Mack & Ret) and Battle Ships (Cov & Hulk)?


Miners will pick the ships based on the differences they like and then structure their fleets to cover the differences they do not like.

For example, they like more yield and they like more tank, so they pick Cov/Hulk almost exclusively. They do not like small ore holds or slow align, so they bypass them with fleet haulers and with higgs rigging and permanent align.

But they're not going to trade off both tank and yield for ore hold or agility, not when there are alternatives.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#292 - 2015-03-01 18:16:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Jinrai Tremaine wrote:
Miners will pick the ships based on the differences they like and then structure their fleets to cover the differences they do not like..
This would be the aim. Procs and Skiffs would be the best solo / ninja miners
Bellak Hark wrote:
Here is your ad
That is brilliant, going to try squeeze it in my bio and the OP of this thread.

Now, did you stalk me or just felt inspired because I often say, "I got lucky with this profile image just don't look at me in 3D" makes it really funny! Twisted

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Bellak Hark
New Eden Media Organization
#293 - 2015-03-01 23:01:34 UTC
I'm glad you enjoyed it. I had been thinking of doing that kind of video but hadn't yet. You just got lucky or unlucky, which ever way you see it.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#294 - 2015-03-01 23:11:55 UTC
Bellak Hark wrote:
I'm glad you enjoyed it. I had been thinking of doing that kind of video but hadn't yet. You just got lucky or unlucky, which ever way you see it.
I am linking it in a URL to people as, "Awesome (lewd videos) share it with your friends" P

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#295 - 2015-03-02 22:53:11 UTC
Strange how long it takes to buy and set up some ships in another system. *Sigh.* P

Can you believe that some people actually play the game? Shocked

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#296 - 2015-03-03 06:39:31 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Pok Nibin wrote:
... There's no way you're going to get me to believe CCP is oblivious of this. If they were intent upon creating this community, the steps to be taken to do so are no secret. That they aren't taking such steps speaks volumes as to their intent. What this does is reduces the CSM election to the equivilent of electing the homecoming queen and court. It's relevant to certain sorts of people, but is essentially insubstantial ...
Indeed. I am here with the experience to say how it is a farce.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#297 - 2015-03-03 16:10:54 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:
It is impossible for one or two devs to calculate every possible combination for each ship. As a result they will simply have to tweak the most popular combinations and boost the least used one's. The game has never been as well balanced over all as it is now.
I liked how the Bowhead needed the players to design it in the feedback threat but at least that dev heard them.

T3 Destroyers .... having them before T3 Battlecruisers ... before fleshing out Battleships and tweaking them ....Ugh
That T3 Ds are so ridiculously over powered ...

I think it is possible to make "fitting" programs that run through most sane optimal fits, then any ship changes can be seen and compared.

CCP needs better code tools for balancing.



They took a step in the right direction by looking at the roles that hulls are best at taking up. My prime example at the moment is this:

(Artillery vs Rails)

Loki has more speed tank than Tengu (751 vs 632 m/s)
Loki wants to avoid webs. (Speed tank)
Loki has shorter optimal range than Tengu (19km vs 35km)
Loki has less sustained damage. (260 vs 412 DPS)
Tengu has larger resist and buffer tank than Loki (200K eHP vs 123K eHP)
Tengu has less volley. (1994 vs 1359 )

Loki need to get closer to apply a quick volley hit, hope they kill, not get webbed, not get tackled, wants to be 19km away at most, while avoiding far faster tackle ships that they wouldn't be able to hit.

So, ** IF ** you were balancing only these two ships against each other. Then you would probably want to improve the optimal range of artilleries, drop the volley to 1700 or so and raise the DPS to about 340 and give them a slightly better tracking to pick off approaching tackle.


P.S. I think %s get in the way of balancing. They can be rather exponential. There should be harder numbers and limits, setting boundaries of min and max performance.
From over here.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#298 - 2015-03-03 20:01:44 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Sibyyl wrote:
... CCP should never go overboard and "design by committee", ...
To chime in here, what people think the CSM does in a lot of ways is silly.
Players are not game designers.
They can crunch down the results and find the flaws but going along and trying to redesign things (like most of my pipe dream Features and Ideas threads ) is a bit like questioning a surgeon because you use a few herbs to smell nice at home, while calling it aroma therapy.
Same thread as above but with highlighting.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Sibyyl
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#299 - 2015-03-03 22:04:50 UTC

Poke. Voting ends Mar 10? How are ya feeling?

Joffy Aulx-Gao for CSM. Fix links and OGB. Ban stabs from plexes. Fulfill karmic justice.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#300 - 2015-03-04 03:02:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Sibyyl wrote:
Poke. Voting ends Mar 10? How are ya feeling?
Resigned to either fate.
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Put a vote in for OP, btw. At least he's thinking, and also doing.
A great endorsement.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.