These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

[AUGUST - 118.7] Serpentis Capital Tweaks

First post First post
Author
Soleil Fournier
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2016-07-26 12:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Soleil Fournier
I would say double cost is too light. 5x base build costs is where these should be. That puts the dread at 10bn - less than super but still wildy inefficient cost wise to normal dreads. Apply the same 5x base cost to the other two hulls and you're at the sweet spot I think.

The rarity of the BPC is going to jack the prices up naturally beyond base cost.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#22 - 2016-07-26 15:03:06 UTC
Soleil Fournier wrote:
I would say double cost is too light. 5x base build costs is where these should be. That puts the dread at 10bn - less than super but still wildy inefficient cost wise to normal dreads. Apply the same 5x base cost to the other two hulls and you're at the sweet spot I think.

The rarity of the BPC is going to jack the prices up naturally beyond base cost.


The BPC's would not be that rare if the ships were more reasonably priced. No one has an incentive to run the Shadow of the Serpent event to earn a BPC for a 30B ISK Dreadnought - because it's so out of most people's price range as to be completely useless. A 10-15BN ISK Dreadnought, on the other hand, is a more attainable goal - while still being a nice enough premium that not everyone and his dog will be flying one - this means that people would actually have a real incentive to complete the Shadow of the Serpent event, or grind the LP needed for the BPC.

CCP's pricing strategy for so many things (e.g. Ship Skins, clothing, etc.) needs so much work it's not funny.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#23 - 2016-07-26 15:06:21 UTC
Actually, as with every faction variant, build-cost should be around what their T1 couterparts (or similar T1 ships) cost, and their value should come from the scarcity of the blueprints. But then, CCP decided to hand out a free Dread BPC to everyone completing the Gold Oroborous, and hand out 5 Titan / Supercarrier BPCs at the end of this event, and everything went crazy.

Also:
Lol at the "So many JFs to get all the mats to build them!" dude.
SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL MINERS, HMKAY.

eVRiAL
Reveka.
NullSechnaya Sholupen
#24 - 2016-07-26 15:35:13 UTC
Syrias Bizniz wrote:
Actually, as with every faction variant, build-cost should be around what their T1 couterparts (or similar T1 ships) cost, and their value should come from the scarcity of the blueprints. But then, CCP decided to hand out a free Dread BPC to everyone completing the Gold Oroborous, and hand out 5 Titan / Supercarrier BPCs at the end of this event, and everything went crazy.

Also:
Lol at the "So many JFs to get all the mats to build them!" dude.
SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL MINERS, HMKAY.


Are you trolling or stupid or both? Wish your miners best of luck though.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#25 - 2016-07-26 15:51:27 UTC
eVRiAL wrote:
Exactly the same reason why buying Revenant for the price of titan or 4 SCs.
Also you just can't build them undetected, volume is crazy.
Vanquisher = 900 JFs
https://market.fuzzwork.co.uk/appraisal/10000002/5797164d92443
Vendetta = 343 JFs
https://market.fuzzwork.co.uk/appraisal/10000002/579716d84012f
Vehement = 74 JFs

if you're hauling cap components in a JF to build your super I truly feel bad for you.
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#26 - 2016-07-26 19:23:51 UTC
and in the mean time we still do NOT have contracts for use in Citadels Roll

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#27 - 2016-07-26 22:45:37 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:
and in the mean time we still do NOT have contracts for use in Citadels Roll



It's being worked on. There's still some discussion with the focus group ongoing. It's a trifle more complex than just 'let contracts go to citadels too' you know.

This comment is, tbh, a lot dumber than you normally manage. Contracts in citadels requires code. This kind of change requires some relatively minor DB changes. Not at all on the same level.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#28 - 2016-07-26 22:59:28 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Freelancer117 wrote:
and in the mean time we still do NOT have contracts for use in Citadels Roll



It's being worked on. There's still some discussion with the focus group ongoing. It's a trifle more complex than just 'let contracts go to citadels too' you know.

This comment is, tbh, a lot dumber than you normally manage. Contracts in citadels requires code. This kind of change requires some relatively minor DB changes. Not at all on the same level.

This is a very sore point for a lot of people. Contracts are absolutely fundamental to how nullsec alliances work and, without them, citadels are not a replacement for stations. Without contracts they feel very incomplete, and contracts have been a LONG time in coming.

For example, Horde just installed a Keepstar in Pure Blind and this is our new staging system. However, owing to the lack of contracts, the old staging point is still being used for practically everything except fleet formups: no Newbean Initiative handouts in the Keepstar, no doctrine ships on contract, no buyback programs (magnificent or otherwise) operating.

I can't wait for contracts to work in citadels. They were required on release.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Cade Windstalker
#29 - 2016-07-27 00:12:33 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
It's being worked on. There's still some discussion with the focus group ongoing. It's a trifle more complex than just 'let contracts go to citadels too' you know.

This comment is, tbh, a lot dumber than you normally manage. Contracts in citadels requires code. This kind of change requires some relatively minor DB changes. Not at all on the same level.

This is a very sore point for a lot of people. Contracts are absolutely fundamental to how nullsec alliances work and, without them, citadels are not a replacement for stations. Without contracts they feel very incomplete, and contracts have been a LONG time in coming.

For example, Horde just installed a Keepstar in Pure Blind and this is our new staging system. However, owing to the lack of contracts, the old staging point is still being used for practically everything except fleet formups: no Newbean Initiative handouts in the Keepstar, no doctrine ships on contract, no buyback programs (magnificent or otherwise) operating.

I can't wait for contracts to work in citadels. They were required on release.


Good thing all the old stations and Outposts are still around then, isn't it. Plus Contracts should be coming to Citadels with the next release, and are currently on the Test Server.

Beyond that... kind of Horde's choice to make that their new staging system when it couldn't meet all of their needs yet.

That said I'd actually encourage things like this as it finds flaws and pain points in the new features faster so I can't really knock the decision from a dev's perspective.
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#30 - 2016-07-27 02:27:05 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Zappity wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
It's being worked on. There's still some discussion with the focus group ongoing. It's a trifle more complex than just 'let contracts go to citadels too' you know.

This comment is, tbh, a lot dumber than you normally manage. Contracts in citadels requires code. This kind of change requires some relatively minor DB changes. Not at all on the same level.

This is a very sore point for a lot of people. Contracts are absolutely fundamental to how nullsec alliances work and, without them, citadels are not a replacement for stations. Without contracts they feel very incomplete, and contracts have been a LONG time in coming.

For example, Horde just installed a Keepstar in Pure Blind and this is our new staging system. However, owing to the lack of contracts, the old staging point is still being used for practically everything except fleet formups: no Newbean Initiative handouts in the Keepstar, no doctrine ships on contract, no buyback programs (magnificent or otherwise) operating.

I can't wait for contracts to work in citadels. They were required on release.


Good thing all the old stations and Outposts are still around then, isn't it. Plus Contracts should be coming to Citadels with the next release, and are currently on the Test Server.

Beyond that... kind of Horde's choice to make that their new staging system when it couldn't meet all of their needs yet.

That said I'd actually encourage things like this as it finds flaws and pain points in the new features faster so I can't really knock the decision from a dev's perspective.

I do agree with all of that. I'm not convinced that it was a good idea to move staging before contracts were enabled.

I was just underlining the point that it is a really important feature, and that perceived impatience is at least somewhat understandable.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#31 - 2016-07-27 19:21:29 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Freelancer117 wrote:
and in the mean time we still do NOT have contracts for use in Citadels Roll



It's being worked on. There's still some discussion with the focus group ongoing. It's a trifle more complex than just 'let contracts go to citadels too' you know.

This comment is, tbh, a lot dumber than you normally manage. Contracts in citadels requires code. This kind of change requires some relatively minor DB changes. Not at all on the same level.


Nice overreacting there from a CSM member, or are you always this courteous when you want to win an argument Question
Defending the delay from CCP in having contracts for Citadels, which many in nullsec find a necessity, is less smart.

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF

Cade Windstalker
#32 - 2016-07-29 17:56:38 UTC
Freelancer117 wrote:
Nice overreacting there from a CSM member, or are you always this courteous when you want to win an argument Question
Defending the delay from CCP in having contracts for Citadels, which many in nullsec find a necessity, is less smart.


I'd hardly call it an over reaction. You were being a smart-*** and Steve gave you a very thorough explanation for why there's no "instantly make a thing work" button.

Also, something for your edification and our entertainment: Contracts in Citadels coming in the August release.Lol

Zappity wrote:
I do agree with all of that. I'm not convinced that it was a good idea to move staging before contracts were enabled.

I was just underlining the point that it is a really important feature, and that perceived impatience is at least somewhat understandable.


Totally fair. Freelancer's reaction though not so much. Complaining about every single feature that gets announced or worked on other than the thing you want just makes a player seem like a brat who knows nothing about development.
ugh zug
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2016-07-30 06:37:27 UTC
this dread is way too expensive to even consider to be anything but a trophy ship. if you want people to use them their build price needs to be just like how you handled other pirate faction ships.

bonuses on it should reflect other pirate faction lined ships, although outside of soloing i don't see the point of the webs. this 400% bonus to Armor Plates and Shield Extenders ***** got to go, and doesn't justify the extreme build price. also this sort of bonus doesn't make sense for balancing either.

ship model wise it's just a re-skind moros and while that is inline with serp pirate faction ships they really should have their own models like other pirate faction ships. you got a huge art department, make it so. no excuse for being lazy, and making art assets for a flop vr game doesn't count.

if you do adjust it properly then please consider refunding all the people who actually built this mutant black sheep already.

Want me to shut up? Remove content from my post,1B. Remove my content from a thread I have started 2B.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#34 - 2016-07-31 12:08:51 UTC
Soleil Fournier wrote:
Why would I invest into a Vehement and be primary on the field when I could just buy a more powerful super carrier for cheaper?


You don't. You get one and then rip the nuts off random subcaps before swooning into the void like the trillion tonne batman you are.
Onslaughtor
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#35 - 2016-08-01 09:09:43 UTC
The build costs for all the new faction caps make little to no sense, this goes doubly for the dread. At its current price point the dread is useless or a waste in any role you could give it even discounting the siege module so you can get reps.

Please reconsider your faction capital build scheme, I know you guys can come up with something better and more balanced than this.
Teddy KGB
3200
#36 - 2016-08-04 18:31:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Teddy KGB
its all made to make people donate. kinda unique vessle but very expansive. so stupid.. i hate what eve came to..
LegaRoSSs
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#37 - 2016-08-04 20:58:17 UTC
30bil dread it's like "Go home, you are drunk"... But ffs, stop being lazy and make unique models for this overpriced ships, not a repaint...

PS. Fozzie sov is is a pile of ****
Decaneos
Casalt Corp
CAStabouts
#38 - 2016-08-05 00:58:00 UTC
So basically with the cost of a supercap, the only people who could fly this and use this are the superbig alliences. if this had been 3-5 times that of a normal dread then hell i would of built it, but 20x is just ********.
lord xavier
Rubbed Out
#39 - 2016-08-05 07:04:34 UTC
eVRiAL wrote:
Exactly the same reason why buying Revenant for the price of titan or 4 SCs.
Also you just can't build them undetected, volume is crazy.
Vanquisher = 900 JFs
https://market.fuzzwork.co.uk/appraisal/10000002/5797164d92443
Vendetta = 343 JFs
https://market.fuzzwork.co.uk/appraisal/10000002/579716d84012f
Vehement = 74 JFs


I am meaning material cost. The Revenant isn't 120b in materials. This is where most peoples issue comes into place. The value in materials alone is just a base. The value itself is going to be higher which is why i don't see any vehement's being actually sieged
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#40 - 2016-08-05 08:23:38 UTC
Count me in as another person that feels that these capitals should be priced at a price point where they are worth risking.

People (sometimes) field a Vindicator or Kronos instead of a Megathron because the extra power of the ship is (sometimes) worth risking an additional 300-900 million ISK.

This isn't the case here.

I feel an appropriate price point to go for is 200-225% of the non-faction competing ships. Slightly more power, significantly higher price.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com

Previous page123Next page