Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1494
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:18:00 -
[121] - Quote
Jamaica Merchant wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: The primary goal here is to provide an interesting set of choices to capital pilots (especially Jump Freighter pilots) in how to fill up their low slots for any given activity.
I can hardly think of anything more interesting than contemplating capital low slots.
lol.. that... specially JF. "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
Kane Fenris
NWP
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:21:00 -
[122] - Quote
Mindo Junde wrote: the word your looking for is heterogeneous, beyond that your are correct
sry for the offtopic but i have to.... http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/inhomogeneous |
beaconBoy SavesTheDay
Galactic Hauling Solutions Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:41:00 -
[123] - Quote
Sugar Kyle wrote:It is a module that comes from a BPC that drops in a spawning site in low sec. I guess we should encourage more people to do besieged sites to keep the prices down, mmm?
Look at how CCP's changes for this summer have been tweaked wtih both low sec capsuleers and jump freighter pilots in mind. Looks like my vote for Sugar Kyle for CSM9 has already paid dividend!
Where can I make a campaign contribution for your run for CSM10?
|
Kari Trace
24
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:18:00 -
[124] - Quote
@OP: Did CCP not just increase the size of ozone as a direct result of how cheap and easy it is to move capitals across the map? Adding modules to make it cheap again defeats the purpose of encouraging local markets, causing capital movement costs to rise, and reducing the easy of movement for said hulls.
If anything make it HARDER for jump drive hulls to move vast distances, not easier. I promise right here as soon as these possible modules hit market every carrier and up pilot will be required to have them in their cargo hold. Also....hulls with higher number of low slots will gain an inherent advantage, perpetuating armor capital doctrines and relegating shield capital doctrines to near laughable non-usage.
0.02 ISK I like making things explode.
Kari Trace |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:13:00 -
[125] - Quote
Kari Trace wrote:@OP: Did CCP not just increase the size of ozone as a direct result of how cheap and easy it is to move capitals across the map? Adding modules to make it cheap again defeats the purpose of encouraging local markets, causing capital movement costs to rise, and reducing the easy of movement for said hulls.
If anything make it HARDER for jump drive hulls to move vast distances, not easier. I promise right here as soon as these possible modules hit market every carrier and up pilot will be required to have them in their cargo hold. Also....hulls with higher number of low slots will gain an inherent advantage, perpetuating armor capital doctrines and relegating shield capital doctrines to near laughable non-usage.
0.02 ISK
I didn't realize that there were caps with less than 4 low slots. cause you know that after 4 mods the stacking penalty makes more useless. |
Alexis Nightwish
State War Academy Caldari State
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 23:02:00 -
[126] - Quote
You want to make nullsec more local and less spread out? More "home-grown" and less of an import society? Then stop enabling jump travel. Scrap these mods.
And if you absolutely have to have these damn things, make them a FLAT decrease in jump fuel cost. Like 100, 150, 200. And no those numbers are not per LY, they are per jump. |
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
272
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:39:00 -
[127] - Quote
Alexis Nightwish wrote:You want to make nullsec more local and less spread out? More "home-grown" and less of an import society? Then stop enabling jump travel. Scrap these mods.
And if you absolutely have to have these damn things, make them a FLAT decrease in jump fuel cost. Like 100, 150, 200. And no those numbers are not per LY, they are per jump.
There is no point in introducing useless modules. If modules are introduced they must make some sense to fit, even if their reasonable usage cases happen to be situational with very small niche.
As addressed in multiple occasions the outright removal of jump drives from EVE will not stop power projection on its own. Although it for sure would be a very populist move in a sense of addressing one of the more visible effects instead of going after the root causes. And ofc like all populist moves it would have significant "unintended consequences" which are obvious to anyone with few brain cells to rub together.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
Sigras
Conglomo
829
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 00:59:00 -
[128] - Quote
Voyager Arran wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Sigras wrote:Please make the modules capital sized (>=4000 m^3) otherwise you may as well just reduce the jump fuel cost of all ships by 25% and call it a day...
If these modules are allowed to be 5 m^3 like most other modules not specifically tied to a ship class then every carrier will just carry around 4-5 of them and insta switch them out when they land. The currently planned volume of these modules is 3500m3 People need to pay more attention to this detail. At best, a carrier can tote around two, and that leaves them without room for any other capital modules in their fleet hangar and also gives up 7,000 m3 that could have just been more fuel. Dreads won't be able to carry any of them at all. And that's the way Uh-huh Uh-huh I like it.
You want cheaper fuel costs, there must be some trade off. |
Elmar Windlicht
Cleptomaniacs dsd Brothers of Tangra
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 03:40:00 -
[129] - Quote
So: Let's be reasonable. The first choice of moving large amounts of [insert something] would be the Anshar because of it's cargo-to-fuel ratio. An 3x Cargo Expander Anshar has 341.990,9m^3, an 2x Cargo Expander Anshar has 268.228,1m^3 (all presumed Freighter IV). So if I am reading the numbers correctly: What you are proposing is a factor 0.783fuckme decrease in cargo hold (spelled out for the public: -21.5686blerg%) to gain a (at maximum, probably horribly expensive) -10% decrease in Jump Fuel? I'd like to know the sales guy who could convince me that this would be a grand idea after you screwed over small corporations by increasing their fuel costs. If you want to disturb power projection by this, go for carriers, moms, titans. Just accept a mistake, accept it and step back from it. But introducing a module that does not make sense at it's first glance is rather insulting. |
Anthar Thebess
638
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 07:50:00 -
[130] - Quote
Make those only for non combat designed capital ships only , so : - Jump Freighters - Rorquals
Jumping supercapitals is already way to cheep now. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption |
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2052
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:16:00 -
[131] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:So travel fits will now include a step to fit these right before you jump then change back to cap recharge fit. I guess that adds a few seconds.
Very much this.
Swapping modules is far to convenient and fast to make any of this an interesting choice. Its more like tedium tbo. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Christopher Tsutola
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:35:00 -
[132] - Quote
so how long do you think it will take for Fozzie to abandon this post and just go ahead with the changes? |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1134
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:40:00 -
[133] - Quote
im in the wrong topic |
Kane Fenris
NWP
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 11:53:00 -
[134] - Quote
Christopher Tsutola wrote:so how long do you think it will take for Fozzie to abandon this post and just go ahead with the changes?
wait ... your saying this hasnt already happened? im confused |
Shaklu
Mass Effect Enterprises Dark Knights of Eden
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 19:02:00 -
[135] - Quote
While I can see, with the addition of low slots on freighters, this making sense; I just don't see why you would increase the amount to jump simply to decrease it again. Especially when almost every other post on the forums is asking for jumping to be harder, not easier.
It makes me think that perhaps the changes that will be done to null to make it better for everyone or harder for blue doughnut to exist, will then be changed back by adding some expensive and hard to get things that only vast mega-alliances are capable of getting in vast quantities, therefore changing nothing. I certainly hope that doesn't happen.
I also agree with the people who say make it a Freighter/Rorq only mod or rig. I read on another post about how it makes little sense that small ships take forever to travel long distances and massive slow capitals can get there instantly (which makes tons of sense) and this just seems to be ignoring that idea, which I find is a good one.
The problem with nerfing jump ranges or fuel costs is that it makes logistics a nightmare.. and EVE runs on logistics.. so give them a boost, but not the combat ships that most agree (via oodles of forum posts) need to get scaled down. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10974
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:02:00 -
[136] - Quote
Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1244
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:17:00 -
[137] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much.
It seems logical to me.
Does this change of mind also comes with a change of volume? Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10976
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:27:00 -
[138] - Quote
Altrue wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much. It seems logical to me. Does this change of mind also comes with a change of volume?
Not at this time, no. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
TAckermassacker
New Republic The Initiative.
57
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:28:00 -
[139] - Quote
everyone wants to gank travelfit carriers, please let them exchange their damage control for a fuel conversator! |
GameFreak X
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:28:00 -
[140] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much.
Gosh darn it fozzie.
I was really looking forward to putting some on my suitecase carrier which basically gets used like a jump freighter for fitted ships (Move a lot of ships, often). I would been happy with rigs for the thing. Why do you have to go and take this away from me? |
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1244
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:36:00 -
[141] - Quote
TAckermassacker wrote:everyone wants to gank travelfit carriers, please let them exchange their damage control for a fuel conversator!
Is that what allows you to talk to your fuel when you feel alone in space? Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
761
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 15:59:00 -
[142] - Quote
I agree with the restriction. While it would have been nice to have on blackops BS, I was less enthused about having the jump drive economy modules available for supercarriers and titans, whose fleet hangars are large enough to carry them without issue. Keeping the modules available only for logistics vessels like Rorquals and Jump Freighters with low to no combat or force projection utility is a good move.
It also gives me a little faith that the Rorqual, one of my favorite and most-used ships, will retain its logistics role going forward. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 17:06:00 -
[143] - Quote
Justin Cody wrote:
Before cynos and bridges sub capitals HAD to use gates. Now gates are for peasants. Gates were natural chokes and made fights happen. Now? Pfft.
force projection needs a complete nerf...no wait not nerf. It needs to be rethought.
Come to WH space and let the peasants use gates. I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
400
|
Posted - 2014.08.07 22:33:00 -
[144] - Quote
Altrue wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much. It seems logical to me. Does this change of mind also comes with a change of volume? +1
I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10967
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 03:17:00 -
[145] - Quote
Are you looking over your numbers on the jump fuel cost increase to see if that was a worthwhile change with intended consequences, or is that a done deal and you're not going to bother? No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Shock Beer
Black Anvil Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 06:42:00 -
[146] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much.
Why would someone be jumping a rorqual around? |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Fidelas Constans
1146
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 08:11:00 -
[147] - Quote
Shock Beer wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much. Why would someone be jumping a rorqual around? 120k cargo + 30k fleet hangar + 250k ore hold + less fuel use than JF makes it a really good industry logistics ship. Especially if you don't want a dedicated JF. |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
87
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 09:24:00 -
[148] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much. Yay, sandbox! These should have been rigs from the very beginning, now look what a nonsense you are creating. Stop it. Make the rigs. And introduce freighter rig slots in the next expansion. |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10968
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 11:49:00 -
[149] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:And introduce freighter rig slots in the next expansion. You're pretty oblivious, aren't you? No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Carniflex
StarHunt Mordus Angels
276
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 13:03:00 -
[150] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far.
After some more discussion we're going to go ahead and limit the fitting of these modules to Jump Freighters and Rorquals. Those are the only places where they would see extensive use anyways and the rest of the ships were muddying the waters a bit too much.
I find this decision highly disappointing. I was really looking forward for fitting these on a BLOPS I use to haul my pod around and/or on a suitcase carrier. This restriction severely limits the player choice in the matter. Also - I believe these would have seen much more frequent use on Carriers than they would on JF's.
On a JF and Roqual the decision is pretty straightforward (depending if you have full bay of stuff, if not fit these) and on top of that the JF nor Roqual has any issues whatsoever carrying these around and/or refitting. If you limit it only for the JF / Roqual then you might as well reduce the volume to 100 m3. Or if you want the volume to be relevant for the Roqual then you would need to increase it above 16 600 m3 per module. The 3500 m3 size is after all specifically targeted at carriers and if carriers cant fit these there is no point of clinging to that particular size.
Granted on a suitcase carrier the decision is just as straightforward - always fit these.
Anyway - I know that patch is sort of creeping near - but have you considered perhaps adding a meaningful penalty to these modules and still allow them to be fitted on all jump capable ships. The most obvious meaningful penalty is ofc course the jump range (give JF and Roqual a role bonus negating that penalty if that is the main location where these modules are supposed to be used). Say, for example, the modules would give the currently proposed fuel savings AND the same percentage penalty into the jump range (similarly stacking penalized).
That would be in my opinion a meaningful decision to be made. Just banning the modules outright on anything but the ships on which they are "designed" to work is limiting player choice and emergent behavior. I can understand why it is needed in some cases (like cov ops cloaks) but the smaller is the number of "exceptions" in the rules the more sand I have in my sandbox.
So I would respectfully request you to reconsider this decision if this is still possible. If not then please add more universal modules for fuel reduction in the next patch without this artificial restriction.
Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... *THWONK!* GOT the bastard. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |