Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1450
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:56:00 -
[391] - Quote
Neo Agricola wrote:Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec. But I live in 0.0. There are times when you +ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on). And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point... use a rorq just like every other 0.0 alliance |
Cabriel
Omni Tech Engineering Needless Friends
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:56:00 -
[392] - Quote
WTG on the first two entries
I like the fact that jump bridge PW are going away. Timers on POS arrays are changing will make it easier to work POSes
HOWEVER POS fuels cubes are epic fail as written.
"We didn't do this ages ago because I couldn't see a good way to handle the handover until someone pointed out the (obvious) half-and-half solution, at which point I punched myself in the head for not seeing that earlier" (Grayscale).
That statement alone shows how little thought Grayscale put into this.
Here are a few problems - You have totally misses the Sov bonuse for POS fuels. - Building fuel cubes will take build slots that some 0.0 stations will not have (or be very limited). - Limited build slots will mean PI will have to be shipped out to process to cubes then shipped back in. - This does not make it easier for a POS manager to add the extra step to build cubes.
Here is what I suggest - Scale the POS fuel timers for faction and Sov. So fuel will last longer if you have a faction or sov or both. That is "obvious!" - Launch with a POS array that can build fuel cubes (or add that feature on an existing one). - Sell punching bags at the Eve stone of Grayscales head...Ill like to punch it too. |
Arkady Sadik
Gradient Electus Matari
191
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:57:00 -
[393] - Quote
So, the large tower use changes are:
-50 isotopes -1 mechanical part -5 oxygen
Total ISK at current prices: 36k
+150 heavy water (worst case) +150 liquid ozone (worst case)
Total ISK at current prices: 52k
So marginally more cost if you run an unfitted tower, marginally less cost on a fully-fitted tower. Sounds quite fair.
Volume-wise, 1h worth of fuel for a large tower at the old values was between 108.5 m3 to 228.5 m3, now it's 200 m3. So, almost twice as much as an unfitted tower. Should be quite close to current volumes for a fitted one, though.
Sounds good to me, thank you for these changes! |
Darkdood
Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:59:00 -
[394] - Quote
Let me begin by saying I think fuel blocks are a great way to streamline fueling towers.
With that said this is a horrible implementation of it.
Why not have the BPO produce 40 fuel blocks per run from the same materials. Each block would be 5m3.
Then setup the towers like so.
Large = 40/hr Large faction = 32/hr Medium = 20/hr Medium Faction = 16/hr Small = 10/hr Small faction = 8/hr
That is based on a 20% discount but you get the idea. If one batch of fuel blocks is a larger amount then everything can be made scalable. The faction towers are still cheaper. You could even scale it for the in between faction towers. Meaning Blood is 15% discount 36/hr and Dark Blood is 20% 32/hr. OR 10% and 15% if you think that is to high.
The only thing we lose is PG and CPU being different. The towers run wide open 24/7 which sucks but its manageable.
You are giving highsec POS tower owners a double hit. They pay more in fuel because they have to run max PG(I normally leave guns offline unless I'm wardeced) and their faction tower now costs full amount even though they paid out the ass to get it.
Making it more blocks per batch doesn't break anything. It's the same volume. It won't add to the database. A stack of 400 block vs a stack of 40 blocks should be almost the same database space.
It could also be a big help to WH POS users because at 5 m3 each they scale better for small loads in small ships. |
Darkdood
Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:59:00 -
[395] - Quote
I double posted but I'm going to use this space to refine my idea.
if the BPO makes 40 blocks you are stuck with 10% increments on savings because of the small towers. What would be ideal would be 400 blocks per run. Math is making my head explode.
4 blocks X 50 m3 each = 200 m3 40 blocks X 5 m3 each = 200 m3 400 blocks X 0.5 m3 each = 200 m3
Exactly. So if you make the BPO produce 400 fuel blocks that are 0.5 m3 each you are perfectly scalable at 1% increments in all tower sizes. You can give sov bonuses and faction tower bonuses as needed without issue.
Large = 400 blocks/hr Large faction is 10% + 3% sov bonus = 348 blocks/hr
Small = 100 blocks/hr Small faction is 10% + 3% sov bonus = 87 blocks/hr
Perfect scalability. Plus the market will love it. Lots of high volume orders to 0.01 isk outbid the competition on. |
HoshinoRuri
Playboy Enterprises Dark Taboo
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:03:00 -
[396] - Quote
From a logistics point of view and filling towers this is nice. Now as to the hw/lo issue would be nice if towers could dual fuel, either the fuel pellets or the old ratios. Another thing those with sov and faction towers do enjoy fuel usage bonus so it costs less to run, this more than increased time is why it is done. This can either be fixed by increasing the number of blocks used to fuel the towers so their are no partial blocks used, increasing by a factor of 10 or making block sized using the materials of 10 then adjusting the number used will help. If not this then possibly an increase in pg/cpu for faction towers and maybe give a similar bonus for people in 0.0 that hold sov.
This will cause a spike in pos fuel due to speculators so be warned speculation is already happening so my advice for pos owners is if you can buy all these materials now and then use an ammo array and make your own at the tower.
One other thing is please do different colors for the different races unless you do one fuel block and it needs one of the 4 ice types to make.
As a pos user love what you are doing to the cycle time for set up and tear down, as well as online/offline. Would love to have an online queuing process. |
Arana Mirelin
Te'Rava Industries
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:04:00 -
[397] - Quote
Cabriel wrote: - Launch with a POS array that can build fuel cubes (or add that feature on an existing one).
Reading is a beneficial skill. This has been mentioned countless times in the thread, and was already answered in the dev blog.
Dev Blog wrote: The four racial fuel blocks will be built in batches of four in all stations, plus starbase ammo assembly arrays
Quote: - Sell punching bags at the Eve stone of Grayscales head...Ill like to punch it too.
I wouldn't mind, might be neat. |
Viktor Maximus
Community against Justice United Pod Service
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:08:00 -
[398] - Quote
We use Faction Towers for lower fuel costs. So why should we use faction towers anymore?
What about the extremly more used Robotics for Large Towers? They are one of the most expensive fuelparts at the moment and you will need 4 / hour with this changes!!! |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:09:00 -
[399] - Quote
are you increasing the size of the ammo assemblys from the current 150k m3?
5 production slots x 5 month fuel block runs will take what 600k m3 of input space. that imo shoudl be the min size of the input/hanger on them CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
mkint
293
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:09:00 -
[400] - Quote
Wiu Ming wrote:a little off topic, but...
"We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change."
This line, in one form or another, has been popping up all over the place lately. Seriously, this is huge and the best Christmas present of all. Thank you CCP... Yeah right, that's what Grayscale said about the anom nerf. Grayscale has less credibility than anyone at CCP, even Hilmar. Short answer, is that whatever happens with these will be to the benefit of the CCP RMT friends, not to the benefit and health of EVE has a whole, especially with Grayscale running it. |
|
Fuujin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
29
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:11:00 -
[401] - Quote
Smoking Blunts wrote:are you increasing the size of the ammo assemblys from the current 150k m3?
5 production slots x 5 month fuel block runs will take what 600k m3 of input space. that imo shoudl be the min size of the input/hanger on them
Protip: equipment arrays can't hold a full amount of minerals for 6 cycles of large guns. You'll have to learn to drag and deal with it. |
Tasko Pal
Spallated Garniferous Schist
14
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:14:00 -
[402] - Quote
Cabriel wrote:
- Building fuel cubes will take build slots that some 0.0 stations will not have (or be very limited). - Limited build slots will mean PI will have to be shipped out to process to cubes then shipped back in.
Build it on the POS. Obviously, I don't know whether they'll let it be built in say an equipment assembly array (which incidentally has mild fitting requirements and cost), but that seems the likely solution to your concern above.
|
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:15:00 -
[403] - Quote
Fuujin wrote:Smoking Blunts wrote:are you increasing the size of the ammo assemblys from the current 150k m3?
5 production slots x 5 month fuel block runs will take what 600k m3 of input space. that imo shoudl be the min size of the input/hanger on them Protip: equipment arrays can't hold a full amount of minerals for 6 cycles of large guns. You'll have to learn to drag and deal with it.
im fully aware of what a equipment array can hold. im just looking at this from a lets not make pos's worse than current point of view. CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:15:00 -
[404] - Quote
Quote:The one downside of this big-blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). We talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they told us that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, we've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" ones. We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change.
From my point of view a very good example for improving the communication between CCP and the community!
Hold that course! |
Rek Esket
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:15:00 -
[405] - Quote
Viktor Maximus wrote:What about the extremly more used Robotics for Large Towers? They are one of the most expensive fuelparts at the moment and you will need 4 / hour with this changes!!!
You can't read.
POS Fuel Changes (OLD -> NEW) [NO SOV] Coolant: 8 -> 8 Mech Parts: 5 -> 4 Oxygen: 25 -> 20 Robotics: 1 -> 1 Enr. Uranium: 4 -> 4 Isotopes: 450 -> 400
POS Fuel Changes (OLD -> NEW) [SOV] Coolant: 6 -> 6 Mech Parts: 4 -> 3 Oxygen: 19 -> 15 Robotics: 1 -> 0.75 Enr. Uranium: 3 -> 3 Isotopes: 338 -> 300 |
Sasmau
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:15:00 -
[406] - Quote
Viktor Maximus wrote:We use Faction Towers for lower fuel costs. So why should we use faction towers anymore? Please don't nerf faction towers :(
I have to agree that simply adding more space is not the right thing to do, then whats the point of it? I thought they were supposed to save money. I don't know who you guys were talking to about them, but they obviously don't know what they are talking about in regards to faction towers.
Other changes are great tho. I would be interested to see the stats on the BPOs, even if they are not final - such as number of runs, and the ME/PE of them (hopefully they are maxed without research).
|
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:16:00 -
[407] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Neo Agricola wrote:Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec. But I live in 0.0. There are times when you +ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on). And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point... use a rorq just like every other 0.0 alliance
Obviously I wasn't able to make myselfe clear:
Why does it have to be a PITA? Why do i have to transport 140k to a tower to run it 29 days? I have to move about 1.400k m^3 each month for fuel alone... even a frighter needs two runs to move that sh*t.
So I'm asking the question why? (and not how to misuse a RQ as a JF)
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:17:00 -
[408] - Quote
Sasmau wrote:Viktor Maximus wrote:We use Faction Towers for lower fuel costs. So why should we use faction towers anymore? Please don't nerf faction towers :( I have to agree that simply adding more space is not the right thing to do, then whats the point of it? I thought they were supposed to save money. I don't know who you guys were talking to about them, but they obviously don't know what they are talking about in regards to faction towers. Other changes are great tho. I would be interested to see the stats on the BPOs, even if they are not final - such as number of runs, and the ME/PE of them (hopefully they are maxed without research).
Maybe CCP could adjust the cycle duration of the faction towers instead of the fuel hold.
Edit: towers -> faction towers |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:18:00 -
[409] - Quote
while your at it can we please please please repackage items in pos corp hangar arrays.... it would really help remove lag. Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Jin Rich
Entropy Extension
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:20:00 -
[410] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Neo Agricola wrote:Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec. But I live in 0.0. There are times when you +ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on). And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point... use a rorq just like every other 0.0 alliance
Alliances. Nullsec. 5 B ISK.
What about us small corps of 1-2 players playing EVE causually and running POSses in lowsec, producing stuff for the markets for the benefit of all you others out there?! Fuel pellets will make it a bit easier on us, but there is currently no plan to reduce the really tediuous work; transporting POS fuel to lowsec.
"Use a rorq" or " buy a jump freighter" you say. Well, they are WAY to expensive for a small corp!
"Flying blockade runners through low sec makes for good targets for pirates/gankers etc - thats good for EVE, and have a nice day!". Nope. I have flown through soo many gate camps in low sec and they never catch a blockade runner anyway (cloaky, warp core stabbed etc).
So why then, has no one in this simulated future ultra-capitalistic world invented a ship to solve an obvious need on the market!?
Might I suggest to you CCP that you consider introduction of a "jump hauler", i.e. a Iteron hull ship with a jump drive that is affordable for small corps (like an Orca maybe?) but has reduced cargo capacity (20000 m3 maybe). Make it work in only lowsec, if it in some way otherwise could impact the "balance" in null (what do I care about nullsec anyway?). Make it easier to maintain POSes in lowsec, and let us spend more time with pewpew instead!
Fuel pellets are good, but it will not reduce the workload for low sec POS owners significantly. Jump haulers would!
Comments, anyone? CCP?
|
|
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:22:00 -
[411] - Quote
Can a GM/DEV answer this
what happens to poses with ordinary fuel in the fuel bays during the change over?
for example the day before patch day... i have a 3/4 full fuel bay in the tower.... after patch is deployed does my tower lose all this fuel and the tower go offline?
Or is the pos fuel in the tower automatically converted into fuel blocks? Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:23:00 -
[412] - Quote
Jin Rich wrote:Weaselior wrote:Neo Agricola wrote:Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec. But I live in 0.0. There are times when you +ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on). And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point... use a rorq just like every other 0.0 alliance Alliances. Nullsec. 5 B ISK. What about us small corps of 1-2 players playing EVE causually and running POSses in lowsec, producing stuff for the markets for the benefit of all you others out there?! Fuel pellets will make it a bit easier on us, but there is currently no plan to reduce the really tediuous work; transporting POS fuel to lowsec. "Use a rorq" or " buy a jump freighter" you say. Well, they are WAY to expensive for a small corp! "Flying blockade runners through low sec makes for good targets for pirates/gankers etc - thats good for EVE, and have a nice day!". Nope. I have flown through soo many gate camps in low sec and they never catch a blockade runner anyway (cloaky, warp core stabbed etc). So why then, has no one in this simulated future ultra-capitalistic world invented a ship to solve an obvious need on the market!? Might I suggest to you CCP that you consider introduction of a "jump hauler", i.e. a Iteron hull ship with a jump drive that is affordable for small corps (like an Orca maybe?) but has reduced cargo capacity (20000 m3 maybe). Make it work in only lowsec, if it in some way otherwise could impact the "balance" in null (what do I care about nullsec anyway?). Make it easier to maintain POSes in lowsec, and let us spend more time with pewpew instead! Fuel pellets are good, but it will not reduce the workload for low sec POS owners significantly. Jump haulers would! Comments, anyone? CCP?
At least someone is getting the point, I wanted to make. But even you are looking at the sympoms and not on the problem. Why does that sh*t have to be so large....
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
Trainwreck McGee
Ghost Ship Inc.
102
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:23:00 -
[413] - Quote
This is awesome but yeah there are a lot of people that posted legitimate concerns that need to be addressed before implementation. CCP Trainwreck - Weekend Custodial Engineer / CCP Necrogoats foot stool |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
67
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:24:00 -
[414] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:Can a GM/DEV answer this
what happens to poses with ordinary fuel in the fuel bays during the change over?
for example the day before patch day... i have a 3/4 full fuel bay in the tower.... after patch is deployed does my tower lose all this fuel and the tower go offline?
Or is the pos fuel in the tower automatically converted into fuel blocks?
Goes offline, if you dont have any fuel blocks in it... you can through in both kind of Fuel, blocks and parts but after the change, only the fuel blocks will work...
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
David Grogan
The Motley Crew Reborn
197
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:25:00 -
[415] - Quote
Jin Rich wrote:Weaselior wrote:Neo Agricola wrote:Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec. But I live in 0.0. There are times when you +ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on). And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point... use a rorq just like every other 0.0 alliance Alliances. Nullsec. 5 B ISK. What about us small corps of 1-2 players playing EVE causually and running POSses in lowsec, producing stuff for the markets for the benefit of all you others out there?! Fuel pellets will make it a bit easier on us, but there is currently no plan to reduce the really tediuous work; transporting POS fuel to lowsec. "Use a rorq" or " buy a jump freighter" you say. Well, they are WAY to expensive for a small corp! "Flying blockade runners through low sec makes for good targets for pirates/gankers etc - thats good for EVE, and have a nice day!". Nope. I have flown through soo many gate camps in low sec and they never catch a blockade runner anyway (cloaky, warp core stabbed etc). So why then, has no one in this simulated future ultra-capitalistic world invented a ship to solve an obvious need on the market!? Might I suggest to you CCP that you consider introduction of a "jump hauler", i.e. a Iteron hull ship with a jump drive that is affordable for small corps (like an Orca maybe?) but has reduced cargo capacity (20000 m3 maybe). Make it work in only lowsec, if it in some way otherwise could impact the "balance" in null (what do I care about nullsec anyway?). Make it easier to maintain POSes in lowsec, and let us spend more time with pewpew instead! Fuel pellets are good, but it will not reduce the workload for low sec POS owners significantly. Jump haulers would! Comments, anyone? CCP?
smart pos monkeys use the planets in their systems to make pos fuel... this negates the need for alot of hauling.
Everytime you buy something that says "made in china" you are helping the rising unemployment in your own country unless your from china, Buy locally produced goods and help create more jobs. |
Crunchmeister
THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD.
85
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:25:00 -
[416] - Quote
David Grogan wrote:Can a GM/DEV answer this
what happens to poses with ordinary fuel in the fuel bays during the change over?
for example the day before patch day... i have a 3/4 full fuel bay in the tower.... after patch is deployed does my tower lose all this fuel and the tower go offline?
Or is the pos fuel in the tower automatically converted into fuel blocks?
Re-read the blog. That's already been explained. |
Fuujin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:26:00 -
[417] - Quote
Jin Rich wrote:[quote=Weaselior][quote=Neo Agricola] Might I suggest to you CCP that you consider introduction of a "jump hauler", i.e. a Iteron hull ship with a jump drive that is affordable for small corps (like an Orca maybe?) but has reduced cargo capacity (20000 m3 maybe). Make it work in only lowsec, if it in some way otherwise could impact the "balance" in null (what do I care about nullsec anyway?). Make it easier to maintain POSes in lowsec, and let us spend more time with pewpew instead!
Fuel pellets are good, but it will not reduce the workload for low sec POS owners significantly. Jump haulers would!
Comments, anyone? CCP?
Rorqs are under 2B in price. Anything you're doing that necessitates a lowsec tower will involve a lot of capital to begin with, either to begin or to maintain/defend. Plus, an iteron will be able to fuel up a tower with a few quick runs. If you're running multiple towers and haven't invested into at least an orca or a rorq, well, I applaud your masochism.
Deal with it. |
svensmokavich
Nomad LLP Wayfarer Stellar Initiative
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:29:00 -
[418] - Quote
WOW i cant beleave that everyone is excited about this.besides the fact that ccp is gonna put another hand in our pockets sort of speek when it comes to pos fuel,why do we need another thing to manifacture?like we dont already have enough to build.in the long run this will drive up fuel prices due to a middle man manifactureing ur blocks,or if u want to do it urself lets waste some manifactureing slots on already needed toons to do stuff that really dosnt make alot of sence,ya it will make fueling ur pos easier but is gonna cost us more[like fueling these damn towers isnt expensive enough]theres no way u can intruduce a middle man into the process and not have the prices go up,ccp dosnt control the market,we do. i really wish ccp would stop trying to change stuff to so called make stuff easier and fix the *&^$%$ problems that we already have with the game.if they spent 1% of the effort into fixing some of the smaller issues ingame instead of tryin to radicaly change what is already there they wouldnt be loseing there 5 year older players to this kind of bs.tx for twisting the knife one more time ccp |
Evelgrivion
Gunpoint Diplomacy
70
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:30:00 -
[419] - Quote
Whoops, meant to post this here rather than in S&I.
Large scale operators aren't the only ones using faction towers; to small scale users, the reduced fuel costs are a tremendous advantage that would be obliterated by this change. Increasing fuel costs completely annihilates any improvements the rest of the fuel system otherwise gives to me.
R.A.M.s consume odd fractions of themselves by being damaged in manufacturing jobs; why can't fuel consumption work similarly?
This is the second time Starbases have been looked at recently; making the experience worse for a portion of the end users when redesigning the system, without the explicit intent to alter game balance, in order to accommodate other end users doesn't really accomplish what you set out to do. |
Fuujin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 20:32:00 -
[420] - Quote
svensmokavich wrote:WOW i cant beleave that everyone is excited about this.besides the fact that ccp is gonna put another hand in our pockets sort of speek when it comes to pos fuel,why do we need another thing to manifacture?like we dont already have enough to build.in the long run this will drive up fuel prices due to a middle man manifactureing ur blocks,or if u want to do it urself lets waste some manifactureing slots on already needed toons to do stuff that really dosnt make alot of sence,ya it will make fueling ur pos easier but is gonna cost us more[like fueling these damn towers isnt expensive enough]theres no way u can intruduce a middle man into the process and not have the prices go up,ccp dosnt control the market,we do. i really wish ccp would stop trying to change stuff to so called make stuff easier and fix the *&^$%$ problems that we already have with the game.if they spent 1% of the effort into fixing some of the smaller issues ingame instead of tryin to radicaly change what is already there they wouldnt be loseing there 5 year older players to this kind of bs.tx for twisting the knife one more time ccp
I have no idea what this guy is saying, but he sounds mad. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |