These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

This Week in EVE #155 - Week 23/2017

First post First post
Author
DiDDleR
Unity of Suns
Warped Intentions
#61 - 2017-06-11 10:56:51 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
george skyshudder wrote:
can we get an update as to when we can expect strategic cruisers to get their rebalance?

We are happily using a nice process here for the focus group, and it is very transparent.

To have a look at the discussions, please check the discussion logs.
To have a look at first proposed changes, please have a look at the Google sheets WIP document.

Please be aware that all this is work in progress (WIP) and should be treated as this. These are by no means any final numbers or decisions!


You might want to read those focus group logs before posting the link LolLol

The last couple of days appear to be just generally complaints about the whole approach CCP are taking
Alexander Draegar
ChemiKals
Goonswarm Federation
#62 - 2017-06-11 20:47:55 UTC
So, a question for the t3 rebalance:

What will happen to my parts and BPCs when the new subsystems roll out? Will I lose my BPCs? Will they change into something else?

"To kick ass harder, swing foot faster. To kick more ass, keep swinging foot!"

~Alexander Draegar

MIKE Commander
Setenta Corp
#63 - 2017-06-11 21:00:22 UTC
This is very stupid move. I cant understand why you bring something new to the game and then nerf it to the ground. If there are too many people ratting with carriers and mining with rorqs, then you CCP are to be blamed for this, because bringing skill injectors to the game was the greatest mistake you ever did to this game. Now everybody can fly whatever he wants in a couple of minutes. It was way better when you had to train months, and even years for some of the ships. It was very well balanced. To be able to rat in a carrier you had to train for one which takes time and isk, and then you had to buy one which requires more investment and time to earn the isk for one.
The skill injectors will dig this game into the ground. And this is just the beginning. Am glad i was one of the old players remembering the good times of this game. RIP EVE.
Alexander Draegar
ChemiKals
Goonswarm Federation
#64 - 2017-06-11 21:16:37 UTC
There's an easy solution to having too many big ships: just create a bigger ship.

In the universe of EVE, there always seems to be a bigger fish. With so many people running around with Supers and (to a far lesser extent) Titans, why not just make something that's big and expensive enough to take team collaboration (again) to build?

These days, there are players rich enough to build and/or buy these ships alone, and then fly them into battle -- then repeat the process. The wealth creep in the EVE universe is clear, and all of this floating wealth simply isn't going to go away in the near future. CCP seems to have recognized this fact with their release of various sizes of Citadels. Perhaps they'll do the same with supercapital ships?

"To kick ass harder, swing foot faster. To kick more ass, keep swinging foot!"

~Alexander Draegar

Morgan Agrivar
Doomheim
#65 - 2017-06-12 10:28:18 UTC
Even after all of this, I will still be playing this game because I love it and I don't care about nullsec capital pilots and their isk faucet being turned off. Like I said in another forum post, the game doesn't revolve around you nullbears.
blaedin jordan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#66 - 2017-06-12 11:07:48 UTC
Morgan Agrivar wrote:
Even after all of this, I will still be playing this game because I love it and I don't care about nullsec capital pilots and their isk faucet being turned off. Like I said in another forum post, the game doesn't revolve around you nullbears.


You were that kid sitting alone in the pool having a good time, weren't you? Because without nullbears, without population, that's what Eve will quickly become. There are vast stretches of nullsec already empty, try roaming through it--it's a shadow of what it was 5 years ago, and changes (like these absolutely horrible ones to fighters) will only make is worse.
Morgan Agrivar
Doomheim
#67 - 2017-06-12 11:14:59 UTC
blaedin jordan wrote:
Morgan Agrivar wrote:
Even after all of this, I will still be playing this game because I love it and I don't care about nullsec capital pilots and their isk faucet being turned off. Like I said in another forum post, the game doesn't revolve around you nullbears.


You were that kid sitting alone in the pool having a good time, weren't you? Because without nullbears, without population, that's what Eve will quickly become. There are vast stretches of nullsec already empty, try roaming through it--it's a shadow of what it was 5 years ago, and changes (like these absolutely horrible ones to fighters) will only make is worse.

Great, then I can move in when all the carrier pilots ragequit.

I don't see what the problem is if that happens.
blaedin jordan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2017-06-12 11:16:19 UTC
Morgan Agrivar wrote:
blaedin jordan wrote:
Morgan Agrivar wrote:
Even after all of this, I will still be playing this game because I love it and I don't care about nullsec capital pilots and their isk faucet being turned off. Like I said in another forum post, the game doesn't revolve around you nullbears.


You were that kid sitting alone in the pool having a good time, weren't you? Because without nullbears, without population, that's what Eve will quickly become. There are vast stretches of nullsec already empty, try roaming through it--it's a shadow of what it was 5 years ago, and changes (like these absolutely horrible ones to fighters) will only make is worse.

Great, then I can move in when all the carrier pilots ragequit.

I don't see what the problem is if that happens.


You're missing the point, probably b/c your nothing more than an apologist troll.
Sylvia Kildare
Flux Divinity
#69 - 2017-06-12 11:16:41 UTC
Vix Sparda wrote:
how about we not nerf the carriers and in stead nerf the vni and ishtar, and take away covert cyno use from strategic cruisers? you guys already railed mining. stop screwing over the non pvp players. and actually give them something instead. it isnt that hard. its called a nice thing. i hope you guys enjoy your now crashing sub numbers.


They've nerfed the Ishtar 3 times in the past 2 years, how about we lay off that talk.

And btw, they nerfed the Ishtar and sentries due to people whining about their overuse in PVP, which affected people who only used the Ishtar for PVE like myself... and so, such fitting irony now, that people are calling for nerfs due to PVE because carriers/supercarriers are being nerfed due to PVE, which will affect people who use them for PVP as well.

Ah, the vicious double-edged nerfbat.
Jonas Skypilot
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#70 - 2017-06-12 11:25:06 UTC
Funny that there are like 1k+ posts in the forum about the Fighter "Balance" but CCP just say "well **** that, we won`t listen to our community"

Never ever gonna go and buy plex with € PirateEvil
Serenta Mystra
N'tech
#71 - 2017-06-12 11:43:47 UTC
So with the nerf, this'll effect all structure defences too, as they use fighters or did CCP 4get that? Complexes have barely any defence atm, and you wanna make'em weaker?!

Ofc. the salvage for any structure rigs requires 'dead' ships. To me it seems a typical keepstar rig, would need a bloodbath fight salvaged (B-R5RB)?! While all we have is the little noctis, when the materials needed are 'Rorqual' sized in salvaging. Fix that first please. . .

Back to Structures, we need a fuel requirement for just 'existing'! Hisec is lettered with abandonned structures! the 7d decommision's bulls h i t!
blaedin jordan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2017-06-12 13:32:01 UTC
Serenta Mystra wrote:
So with the nerf, this'll effect all structure defences too, as they use fighters or did CCP 4get that? Complexes have barely any defence atm, and you wanna make'em weaker?!

Ofc. the salvage for any structure rigs requires 'dead' ships. To me it seems a typical keepstar rig, would need a bloodbath fight salvaged (B-R5RB)?! While all we have is the little noctis, when the materials needed are 'Rorqual' sized in salvaging. Fix that first please. . .

Back to Structures, we need a fuel requirement for just 'existing'! Hisec is lettered with abandonned structures! the 7d decommision's bulls h i t!


Another great point, and another reason why CCP's decision to force this down our throats at the last minute hasn't been well planned. It's a knee-jerk reaction that should scare anyone looking down the line at the longterm viability of this game if so shortsighted is their aim and focus.
Lothar Mandrake
Mandrake Executor Corp
Mandrake Alliance
#73 - 2017-06-12 14:34:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Lothar Mandrake
Serenta Mystra wrote:
So with the nerf, this'll effect all structure defences too, as they use fighters or did CCP 4get that? Complexes have barely any defence atm, and you wanna make'em weaker?!

Ofc. the salvage for any structure rigs requires 'dead' ships. To me it seems a typical keepstar rig, would need a bloodbath fight salvaged (B-R5RB)?! While all we have is the little noctis, when the materials needed are 'Rorqual' sized in salvaging. Fix that first please. . .

Back to Structures, we need a fuel requirement for just 'existing'! Hisec is lettered with abandonned structures! the 7d decommision's bulls h i t!


Thank you so much for saying this!

I decommissioned every complex and citadel and REFUSE to put them back up due to lack of defenses against even 10 attacking ships. So sorry I don't want to turn my citadel into some epic war that CCP can exploit in their videos library.

The 7-day decommission is complete nonsense as well. It should be 24 hours at the most.

If a citadel or engineering complex runs out of fuel, it should begin the decommission sequence automatically forcing the owner to put it back online or get it out of the way. The same applies to the even larger amount of POS control towers offline parked at moons preventing others from putting one up. Those should repackage themselves as well.

-

Sethyrh Nakrar
#74 - 2017-06-12 15:47:49 UTC
I don´t have a carrier, but when I realise, that a Rattle can do almost the same(wich I can already use), why should I skill then 6+ months for a big hunk of metal, wich is pretty useless now?
Just because a Dev clearly hates that shipclass.....Question
Its just dump. Sorry, but its true. I don´t even care to plan for any cap now, because dreads may be the next ones to nerf.
Somebody has clearly no vision anymore, how to develop this game further or even to balance it. Just look at the mess, the subcaps are(HAC, some BS,....).
Just my opinion.

Praise the Omnissiah!

Hamar Halltyr
Nemesis Logistics
Goonswarm Federation
#75 - 2017-06-12 16:19:21 UTC
CCP please think again about making this "Patch" to fighters


I by myself didn´t fly a carrier/Super but you will drive away player with that kind of behavior

I´m totally fine with that ghosttraining thing because in my eyes it is bug using, but maybe next time make a ingame notifcation after that "that player should check there training queue

and for God sake fire your economics adviser or get one who know´s what he is talking about

to reduce the isk income of players is a way to cure your economics sure but only in that way that you lose subscriptions. YOU have to find something player want spend isk to an npc again and again a really isk sink
Rexxar Santaro
Forex Corp
#76 - 2017-06-12 17:20:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rexxar Santaro
About fighters nerfs

Well, I’m a noob in practical Null-Sec Alliance politics, but I’m interested in it and I got enough knowledge to realize that this nerf and few other previous nerfs are an attempt to reconfigure the Null-Sec structure by CCP. Obviously, in the RedSwarm Federation’s favor, based what EVE Map and Monthly Economic Reports showed on economic activity during the last few months.

The result of B-R5RB battle just pushed the PL and PanFam coalition in a really bad situation. The cap ship nerfs did even more, considering the PL mastered cap fleet fights very well.

I’m surprised that almost all TEST members on this thread just raging about cutted ISK grind by carriers. The fighters nerfs has nothing to do with ISK. If you want to cut the ISK/H, the Null-Sec bounties Faucets – just reduce the bounties by 30% or 50% and that’s all (just change one digit in your script) and no need to dismantle those weakened alliances. Considering the situation of going POS and incoming “citadels”, having those nerfed frigates will make harder to defend them. The greatest battle of this spring at HED-GP just revolved that Legacy depends by carriers and cheap artillery fleets at defense and offense (it’s just revealed). That POS battle, in my opinion, was a strong TEST CEO’s move to control better such an important system for Hi-Sec access and bridge beacon in southern region. The carriers nerfs is a strong blow to Legacy power, because their Hels had an important role in the HED-GP battle, as some from PanFan said “BRAVE Hel on the grid”.

IDK about Drone Region Federation, but during some Sunday I did exploration there from Etherium Reach to Cobal Edge and I met like 15 pilots, which was not the ISK grinders or miners.

We should wait to see the changes to T3 ships, especially how this will affect those alliances which have big Tengu’s fleets.
More, CCP planning to increase the drop chance of pirate faction ships BPC, which will turn into huge amount of BPC on the market. For example, last month in Delve was mined ore on 8.9 T ISK.

I’m feeling, we’ll see a 20000 army roaming Null-Sec on Machariels, Naglfars, Gnosis, Gilas, Rattlesnakes… and how the Citadel and capital shields will hold this IDK, before we’ll see another big nerfs for pirate ships. Who will wing in a battle 10000 Machariels vs 1200 Machariels, considering no capital, carrier, sub-cap support? Just for High-Sec mantra players, we can see that army in Hi-Sec operating legally through WarDecs like PIRAT’s doing this in Domain and Perimeter. The CCP is trying to balance the game to make it more casual, but it can have practically a cancer effect for this game.
It’s interesting to read something about what the alliance CEOs are discussing about these changes…

About Rorqual nerfs

If I’m not wrong, it’s an attempt to bring Drone regions to life, for PVE, through farming those Drone AI and components. There are super powerful and expensive Excavator Mining Drones and they are very useful for rich players, considering drone components prices on the market.
CCP Phantom
C C P
C C P Alliance
#77 - 2017-06-12 17:26:48 UTC
Please also read the Updates To Fighter Balance Changes Coming With The June Release.

CCP Phantom - Senior Community Developer

Sylvia Kildare
Flux Divinity
#78 - 2017-06-12 18:09:01 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:
@Phantom, can you check whether the new boosters' validity can be increased by 3-4 weeks? Just let them expire a couple of days after the event is a bit lame.

... to give traders something to do. Smile


I have forwarded your feedback to the dev team, but cannot make any promises if there will be a change in expiry date. There are always a multitude of things to consider when it comes to expiry dates.


And yet some events the boosters expire a few days after the event... whereas others (last Halloween's Blood Raider event), the boosters expire 4-5 weeks after the event (last year's Blood Raider Crimson Harvest ended a bit after Halloween in early November, the boosters expired on December 1st IIRC).

It is a bit random, some consistency would be nice on that. Either let them last after each and every event so the market traders can have fun like Tipa Riot said... or have them end shortly after the event each and every time so it really is an event-only thing and if people want to make money on the market, they'll have incentive to farm the sites right at the start rather than being able to take their time.

Instead, we keep jerking back and forth between both styles.
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#79 - 2017-06-13 01:52:49 UTC
Quote:
2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

3. Ranting is prohibited.

A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

8. Use of profanity is prohibited.

The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.

33. "Quitting" posts are only permitted on the Out of Pod Experience channel.

CCP recognize that during the course of gameplay a lot of friendships are made between players and that sometimes if a player is taking a break or departing from the EVE universe that they would like to say goodbye on the forums. Posts of this nature are only permitted on the Out of Pod Experience forum, and must be civil and well worded.


Post removed for one or more of the above reasons.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#80 - 2017-06-13 04:19:24 UTC
While some of the re-changes are welcome, NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%) shows that after the complaining by the 1% of the 1% of Null started up, members within CCP who represent the Null sec fan club seem to have once again decided that 2 regions in Null gaining more in NPC bounties than the rest of the game is fine and dandy and can be sorted out later.

This is why EvE is now free to play, when you constantly give to one part of EvE and ignore the rest to fight over scraps, those left in the rest of the game are not overtly happy.

Hell its not like it even makes sense in risk vs reward as Wormholes are a lot more dangerous.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.