CSM Campaigns

2 PagesPrevious page12

Ncc 1709 for CSM XII

Shadow Cartel
#21 - 2017-03-06 11:00:52 UTC
What do you think about ccpls 2nd rorqual nerf and how would you change null sec mining?
Badfellas Inc.
#22 - 2017-03-06 14:46:13 UTC
I am not surprised by it, but on the same note, the proposed changes to panic mode are badly thought out.
the easiest fix for the jump hic would to have the same penalties to e-war as Triage and Network sensor arrays have.

then there would be no need for this ' must have asteroid targeted' sillyness

as for the yield, i think it pushes the risk vs reward too far towards risk for smaller entities to continue using. With the original yield, you could repay the full cost of a rorqual including drones, with about 20 hours mining.

with the present yield, its closer to 50 hours and after the patch, it will be near 85h constant mining in order to repay the costs of the ship. these times do not include the time spent re positioning due to the increased belt spread, which will push the figure out to 120h of mining to repay the initial cost of a rorqual setup.

a carrier can repay its initial investment in 12 hours and is not stuck in the same place, a supercarrier can repay its self in 50 hours, and cannot be tackled by an interceptor.

so what i see happening is people moving away from mining, reducing the number of accounts they use and just ratting for income instead.

to improve the general feeling of double nerf, the build requirements of the excavators could be half''d to reflect their reduced yield.
Shadow Cartel
#23 - 2017-03-06 16:09:19 UTC
Looks solid +1
Badfellas Inc.
#24 - 2017-03-06 19:13:55 UTC
Probably the most knowledgeable chap I have encountered in the game. He has a passion for eve and teaching others.
Badfellas Inc.
#25 - 2017-03-06 22:44:38 UTC
smart and mature +1
#26 - 2017-03-08 17:40:04 UTC
07 Candidate!

First, thank you for your time and effort (both present and future) in representing the capsuleers of New Eden! They’re much appreciated.

I’m preparing to cast my vote in the CSM12 elections. After reading the information you submitted, though, I still have a question.

By way of background, I started in Eve as a hauler, moving freight in T1 industrials and gradually working my way up in both ships and cargo. However, I repeatedly found my progress impeded by gankers who would destroy my ship and steal my cargo. In low- and null-sec space, that’s to be expected. You place your bet and take your chances. In high-sec space, however, this is very frustrating. Why have high-sec space at all then? This frustration drove me into anti-ganking, and I’ve been a proud member of Thomas en Chasteaux's High-Sec Militia for several months now.

So, my question. Where do you stand on high-sec ganking? I’ll concede that ganking is a legitimate style of game play, as CCP has ruled. But I also feel that it should be difficult and dangerous (for the ganker) in the 30% of New Eden designated as high-sec space. In particular, I’d like to see CCP tweak the game mechanics so that the criminal flag generated by looting a ganked freighter in high-sec space follows all players who handle that loot, and otherwise make looting more realistic. (Thomas en Chasteaux's ideas, not mine.)

As a member of the CSM, would you present such an idea to CCP? Would you push for its adoption? What other game changes might you consider to make high-sec ganking more difficult and less profitable?

Cochise Chiricahua.
Badfellas Inc.
#27 - 2017-03-09 20:12:52 UTC
Personally, ganking is too cheap, too easy. being able to kill billion isk ships with 300m worth of throw away ships with no significant drawbacks is a bit too overpowered. it has made it less safe to be in highsec than nullsec with haulers :(

i am unsure how to counter this other than maybe hiring an npc escort party to try and protect you from hostiles, but this wont stop the kill.
Badfellas Inc.
#28 - 2017-03-23 04:12:36 UTC
If your still to vote, please include me in your choices as a vote for the small person
2 PagesPrevious page12
Forum Jump