EVE Information Portal

6/10 farmer detected. Named rally points are good even if their escalations aren't as great.

shame about the null sec wormhole nerf, its literally the only thing that makes eve interesting

* nerf local (anonymize it, delay it whatever)
* nerf watch list (slightly irrelevant considering titans and supers will be useless)

lets hope the random fights over entosis links will be interesting..

I do nothing but rally points exclusively because when a roamer comes into my system in his uncatchable interceptor the first thing he does is warp to a forsaken hub or sanctum while my butt is getting safe

Have you tried fighting each other in wormhole space?

Anomalies are not really very scalable. Ok you have more anomalies but you still have to travel to each one to find a vacant one.

Why not replace anoms with missions?

A few advantages:

- Totally scalable, you can have 200 guys living in a system
- Forces mission runners to travel around to run the missions (make them never be in the same system as the agent)
- Make life harder for botters (I'm no expert but it should be easier to program a bot to run anoms than to run missions)
- Kill afk ratting, which is pretty much cancer to this game (although I abuse it as hell)

Actually, yes. And risk aversion by both parties. One side for dogpiling and the other side for picking ships that snipe off tackle and can easily avoid fights. We all suck is what i'm trying to say.

Still nothing on cloaky camping and defending our space against it?

What makes you say year? Just assumption based on CCP's speed of smell release mechanics?

Any word on Outpost/Outpost upgrade revamp?

Any news on the Relic sites for the rogue drones?

If not could we at least have a small chance of one of the other pirate faction's sites spawning?

Edit - also do these changes also cover the drone lands?

Overall I like most of these changes. I think it's a good start.

I don't see anything in these changes about being able to remove or offline specific IHUB upgrades. Considering how the current system works, once they are plugged in they cant be removed, and the upkeep cost keeps going up. This is why many sov holders had multiple IHUBS in system so they could online one with limited system upgrades for ratting/mining bonuses, but switch on a different IHUB if they needed more expensive bonuses - like Supercap building, Cyno Jammer, Jump Bridge/Beacon.

Since the new system only allows one IHUB per system, how will we be able to micromanage this? Can we plug and unplug upgrades? Turn them on/off individually? It's kinda important to know this.

---

Adding more bonuses to make lower truesec systems more attractive - finally an incentive to actually want to take sov space, and upgrade it; as well as partially addressing the population density issue for systems to be able to support more pilots in a smaller footprint. Whether it will be enough incentive for smaller groups to try to grab currently unwanted space remains to be seen - but at least you're finally showing us a carrot instead of just beating us with a stick.

The increased bonuses from the Pirate Detection Array, Survey Networks, Entrapment Arrays all sound good.

For the Data/Relic Sites, the value of most of that loot has ALREADY been depressed, and people have been complaining about it for months. The last change from Team Space Glitter did nothing to fix the issues. So start planning to step in and make changes NOW, because it's already bad. For reference, please read this thread.

Will the Survey Network also increase the chance of spawning Sleeper Cache or Ghost Sites?

Keep in mind that truesec affects more than anomalies and rat difficulty. Sounds like the mining yields won't be adjusted from the Ore Prospecting upgrades. How will lower truesec systems be upgraded to increase Planetary Interaction yield, or Booster Gas sites?

---

Pretty pissed off at the wormhole changes to be honest. Absolutely no discussion on it publicly - so basically specific CSM members complained, and you're making more changes to increase safety for nullsec at the expense of wormholers. At least this devblog has more information than the patchnotes- and I think it's the lack of transparency that has most of us upset.

---

Would definitely want to see some deployment location restrictions for the ESS. Placing the ESS inside an active anomaly, then purposefully spawning multiple waves to protect it; or putting it on a POS to guard it is clever, but the goal is to make the inhabitants actually undock to defend their riches. I'd like to see the ESS limited to being anchored on a planet, so these kind of tricks are harder to do. Whether or not it can be on grid with one of the new Citadel structures is another discussion - especially if it has to be gunned to fire at something.