EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2004-12-25 21:35
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 14:26
  • Number of Posts: 79
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 73

Ampoliros

Security Status 4.4
  • Aperture Harmonics Member since
  • Plucky Adventurers Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Boston & New England Meet - August 10th 2PM in EVE Gameplay Center

    t'was swell. boston meet best meet. See you all again soon. Cool

  • Boston & New England Meet - August 10th 2PM in EVE Gameplay Center

    Bus tickets are purchased, I will be there. I hope the red line isn't too bad.

  • Dev Blog: Rebalancing and Renaming Industrials in EVE Information Center

    Will any of the specialized haulers be able to carry refined ice products (isotopes, hw/lo, stront)? Specifically eyeing the Miasmos, although I guess it might fit onto the Kyros too.

  • CSM December minutes: The EVE Economy in Council of Stellar Management

    Weaselior wrote:
    There's an apparent belief at CCP that a pos revamp would "only affect a small number of people".

    That's wrong. Current POS are only used by a small number of people because they are poorly done and useless.

    If you make them useful and not horrifically annoying, that will change!


    This is very true and needs to be stated more

    POS life interacts with a large portion of EVE (wh especially, but even null/low/high and the markets regularly), and if properly revamped players would interact with them even more

    I can't recall the feature, but I feel like we've been in this situation before where the following conversation happened:

    CCP: "We're not going to revamp x, because nobody uses x"
    CSM/Players: "nobody uses x, because x is crappy and unusable"

    It's a ridiculous cycle that means that bad features get left by the wayside, when in reality it's a simple case of 'if you build it, they will come'

  • Capital reps and Armor Links (Confirmed Stealth Nerf) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    Yup the implications of the change were not spelled out very clearly, we should have put a lot more explanation into the note. What it means is that no modules or skills will affect the capital remote assistance mods unless they are explicitly programmed to. So that applies to gang mods, rigs, implants, and skills.


    That's a pretty severe and sudden nerf, especially to dedicated triage pilots. I get making it consistent, but removing all bonuses entirely is pretty unnecessary unless you guys were concerned about capital RR being too strong (in which case, why not be honest about it and nerf it directly?)

    What?

  • Dev Blog: More from you and less from the evil nasty NPC in EVE Information Center

    CCP FoxFour wrote:
    Due to the desire from people in this thread, and some other reason, we have decided that there needs to be some new containers. Specifically in the category of freight containers, ones that have the same capacity and volume so can be used in freighters.

    This is what I am currently thinking:

    Small Freight Container: 1,000 m3
    Medium Freight Container: 5,000 m3
    Large Freight Container: 10,000 m3
    Huge Freight Container: 120,000 m3 (the current General Freight Container)

    I am upset that small does not mean 120 m3 like small does for all other use cases in containers. This goes the same for medium and large. So I maybe want to find a new name for them.

    Do we need the 1,000 m3 version?


    1000 m3 version seems like it'd be handy for moving a few modules/items from jita for someone.

    not sure you need both the 5 and 10k versions though. maybe move the med to 10k, the large to 120k, and add a larger container size at 250-300k?

  • 64bit EVE in EVE Communication Center

    CCP Explorer wrote:
    Nodes with little traffic end up using about 950 MB, most common is 2-3 GB, and then there is normally a handful of nodes that use more than 6 GB (Jita on a busy day, nodes that host WH constellations, nodes where large fleet fights occur).


    Interesting. Do W-space systems consume more memory than your average system? Or is it a case where many WH systems are mapped to one node (because overall low per-system activity?)

  • New dev blog: Clothing and Aurum additions for Inferno 1.1 in EVE Information Center

    Coming in a bit late, but is this...

    Quote:
    Existing items from before June 19th will remain in the store, for now, at the current prices so that we don’t devalue the investment that some players have already made.


    ...an actual concern that other players have? I mean, people buy games on steam every day that may go on 75% off sales some months later, nobody rages and demands the price difference refunded to them. Nobody sane, anyway.

    I assume CCP have framework in place to handle sales in the NeX store as well and it's not really sensible to keep the prices set in stone. Why not just cut the prices across the board? Maybe keep the monocles super-expensive, as the price is probably why most people buy them anyway, but most of the mundane stuff could probably be lowered as well.

    Not that i care much anyway, but yknow, food for thought.

  • Fixing Technetium in EVE Communication Center

    Vincent Athena wrote:
    CCP Soundwave wrote:
    Ring mining might have to move back in favor or re-doing POSs.

    In the meantime, I'd really just like to alchemy every single tier of moons (like it was done with 64s).


    If you are thinking about opening up alchemy, you might want to actually look at the periodic table and use it to find reactions that are physically possible. For example Hafnium is element #72, Technetium is element#73. If you took Hafnium and fused it with Hydrogen (actually to get the Neutron count right, Deuterium, but that is a Hydrogen isotope) you would get Technetium.

    Tungsten + 2 Helium = Platinum

    Platinum + Helium = Mercury

    Cadmium + 2 Carbon = Neodymium

    And so on.


    Just go all out and turn all POS reactors into SpaceChem. Cool

  • Fixing Technetium in EVE Communication Center

    CCP Soundwave wrote:
    Ring mining might have to move back in favor or re-doing POSs.

    In the meantime, I'd really just like to alchemy every single tier of moons (like it was done with 64s).


    I'm not a huge market guy, but every time i've checked, including soon after their release, the alchemy reactions were always hugely unprofitable. The overwhelming majority of change in the moongoo market was from the rebalance in build costs.

    At the very least, if you went this route, you'd have to buff the reaction stats up a bit, add new ones, and rebalance them for more mineral types. I would suggest having multiple reactions per output (eg, 100 a gets you 10 b, but 400 c or maybe 10 e plus 100 f might get you 10 b as well, etc), as i think the worst case scenario is that you just shift the bottlenecks around slightly and don't really fix anything.

    I also really like the idea of moons shifting around, i think it opens a lot of possibilities for border warfare ('hey, you put a tower up in my space', 'well, you weren't using it'), resource coveting ('they got n good moons and we don't have any, not fair'), etc - but it'd really need a revamp of the moon scanning mechanic to not make it boring and tedious.

    I wouldn't move away from moons entirely, either, as I think they can be a solid conflict driver if done right.

  • Minmatar V3 on SISI. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Definitely not a fan of the Core complexion black scheme from the previews i saw on Sisi. They look like a direct copy+paste from the khanid sets and not really unique/fitting the minnie scheme.

    Rusty red with black stripes or something i could probably deal with

  • New dev blog: Alliance Tournament X – Full schedule, Prizes and Streaming changes in EVE Information Center

    that's a very...interesting first prize, i must say

  • New dev blog: Unified Inventory Changes in EVE Information Center

    CCP Soundwave wrote:
    Oxandrolone wrote:
    Quote:
    We’re going to allow renaming of all POS structures, this should let players navigate more easily in the tree view, instead of a large group of identical items.
    \o/

    does this mean only in the inventory window or mean we can rename SMA's and CHA's just like drugs labs etc?


    rename..............EVERYTHING.


    Will I be able to give my large artillery batteries exciting names?

  • New dev blog: Unified Inventory Changes in EVE Information Center

    very happy to see this blog, it all looks very good and/or reasonable

    quick question - rather than just adding some differentiation in the inventory between what we can and can't see in POSs, is it possible to increase the 'view' distance on structure contents so we can just see more/everything? I was initially and very secretly hopeful that it would let me view the ammunition status on all of the untold number of guns I have, and while I was thwarted it would be pretty awesome.

  • EVE Online: Inferno - Feedback thread in EVE Information Center

    Yeah, I'm generally okay with unified inventory, but it is *awful* at POSs

    You have:
    - 15-20s inventory loadtimes with the index open when arriving on grid as it attempts to load every little POS gun and hangar array
    - Massive screens of POS modules that make it impossible to find what you want, and being as you can't rename half the structures or resort/filter anything it's a massive UI mess. I now have to browse in between about 20 guns to find what I want.
    - No functionality added, because i still have to be within 2.5k to access or view anything.

    In short, I have a massive, hard to use window, that takes forever to load, that does absolutely nothing helpful.

    Suggestions:
    - Move the inventory of defense modules into their own sub-menu under starbase structures, so it looks like:
    \/ Starbase Structures
    > Corporate Hangar Array
    > Ship Maintenance Array
    (etc..)
    \/ Starbase Defense Structures
    > Medium Pulse Laser Battery
    (etc...)

    This one absolutely has to be done, it's just nonfunctional otherwise.

    - Let us rename more structures at POSs or alter the sorting of the left side index.

    -Remove the range-related view limitation on structure contents. You're probably loading the stuff anyway, just let us view it!

    Thanks.

  • War Dec, Kill Reports and New Modules discussion in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Zarnak Wulf wrote:
    Tsubutai wrote:
    CCP SoniClover wrote:
    Regarding the fueled shield booster - I doubled the effect, the cap use and the capacity. So you can carry more, each charge will be much more effective, but running the module without charges is crippling.

    I don't see how that's crippling - what's to stop people from simply dropping down one size of shield booster? For example, if you were previously running an XL-boosted sleipnir, it seems that the changes would allow you to use a large fueled booster instead and get approximately the same boost amount/cap consumption as before while having more cap charges loaded and ready to burn.


    Except as soon as you turn off TE shield booster it will start it's reload cycle.

    Honestly - increase the capacity so we can get 6-8 cycles off of the cap charges an I would buy it.


    rclick->autoreload off.

    i'm somewhat concerned about what Tsubutai said as well, doubling all around is a bit too strong. I might suggest increasing the shield boost/cap use by 25% or so over the base values on Sisi now, increase the capacity by 100% as planned, and then add an extra 75-100% shield boost while it's loaded with cap chargers (if you can do that). It'll be an incredibly strong booster for 30-40 seconds while you can inject it, but go crazy inefficient once you run out (at which point you better gtfo)

  • New dev blog: Unified inventory in EVE Information Center

    CCP Optimal wrote:
    Just wanted to note that due to popular demand we've made changes so that the inventory window will have two sets of width, height, position and tree collapsed/expanded settings; one for stations and one for space, so you'll be able to configure it as you please for both scenarios.


    Groovy.

    If possible, i'd prefer you could add the potential for more settings based on where you are or how you open the inventory screen. I'd love to have it use one setting where i'm in space at my POS (where i'm going to want the tree and a big window) and a different setting when i want to loot someone's wreck (where i want a small window and small tree), and not have to resize it down or up each time.

  • Singularity Missile & Launcher Defect Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    -The bomb effects are a bit small and underwhelming right now, it could use a bit more 'boom'

    - the launchers on the bottom of the phoenix appear to be linked in the reverse order; firing on a ship to your right causes the left launcher to fire (along with the two right side launchers), whereas firing on a ship to the left causes the right side turret to fire. This causes the missiles to clip through the ship sometimes. Might not be that clear, so let me know if you need pics (too lazy right now) :P

    - Hit effects look nice, although they need sound effects as well. I assume that's WiP though.

    Nice job all around, though. Zipping around in my 100MN tengu was pretty awesome, watching the missiles peel off and seek after the target was excellent. The citadel torpedo barrages look amazing as well, props.

  • War Dec, Kill Reports and New Modules discussion in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Do you happen to have stats/fitting or info onhand for the new mods (ideally the adaptive hardeners and the shield boosters) so i can ponder them while waiting for Sisi to come up? P

  • New dev blog: Alliance Tournament X Rules in EVE Information Center

    This is why we can have nice things. Cool blog, very happy with the changes so far. Cool