EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2009-02-14 02:48
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-10-18 20:20
  • Number of Posts: 2,738
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Cade Windstalker

Security Status 5.0

Last 20 Posts

  • New Asteroids in EVE Communication Center

    Per this response from the feedback thread the size changes were factored into the yield changes to the Rorqual, so no this wasn't an indirect nerf it was intended.

    The impact on drone mining is expected and we did our internal practical yield testing with the new asteroid sizes to make sure that the resulting m3/hour were something we'd be happy with.

    Also from some testing in that thread, you can sacrifice some tank on a Rorqual to get a bit more yield on larger rocks by fitting Drone Navigation Computers.

  • [March] Balance Tweaks: Fighters, Supercarriers & Burst Projectors in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Trevize Demerzel wrote:
    Brings up a good point.

    If the goal was to make carrier ratting more of a challenge it should be done with challenging content and not making the challenge more of a click fest. Making the user click faster isn't a "challenge". If the goal is to make carrier ratting more engaging then make some new ratting sites with harder things to kill. ie other caps.

    And ya the heavy fighters could use more HP. In PVP they are way to easy to alpha off the field.

    The current Carrier ratting isn't particularly more of a click fest than the old one, it adds about one click per ship kill more, which is telling your Fighters to orbit the next target before the last one died. That's something like a ~25% change, give or take. The main things that you need to do now are be paying attention and do a little advanced planning with your Fighters, having the next thing locked up and killing the smaller ships first.

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Trevize Demerzel wrote:
    Sure! If the Fun / Risk / Reward balance is good. Most certainly.

    So what you are asking for is "buff carrier/super rating" since those harder site would need to be more lucrative to get run.

    Doesn't have to be Carrier/Super ratting, CCP have already said they want the end-game of Null PvE to be more group focused. Content that requires a group to be run is inherently harder to because you need to organize the group, and you need people you can rely on.

    Case and point is Incursions. They make almost as much as a mediocre Carrier Ratting pilot per hour but you need to rely on 39 other pilots knowing what they're doing, especially the Logi, or you can quite easily lose your ship, and that's without factoring in player interference. Create something like that in Null but make it permanent local content instead of a roving spawn system and you could quite reasonably dial up the risk, rewards, and general difficulty of the PvE for pilots in Null without throwing the whole game's economy out of whack.

    Besides it doesn't need to be a huge difference in payouts. Players will always gravitate towards the highest possible payout so long as the Risk/Reward balance isn't obviously out of whack.

  • A way to gather Scattered Items in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Wolfino wrote:
    Then just make it so the items have to be on that character in that same system for an entire year

    At which point CCP have to do a lot of work to make the server keep track of a lot of location data for a super niche feature that actively breaks part of the game by making blocked asset retrieval easy.

    Just do what everyone else does, either sneak an alt in to the corp that owns the space and use that to get your stuff out, fire sale it, or plan ahead and don't leave your stuff somewhere you won't be able to easily get it back before going AFK for months or years.

  • Aeon model in EVE Technology and Research Center

    They're probably going to be at least tweaking all the Capital models so they use the new Texture Tech and don't look quite so much like they were designed under a 250 polygon limit.

  • Serpentis Vigil DED Rated Complex - Mining vessels blocked out. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    It's probably because if you could take Barges and Exhumers in there they would be the best low-skill ships to run the site in.

  • Dev Blog: PLEX Rework - Follow Up in EVE Information Center

    Laechyd Eldgorn wrote:
    Nice amount of assumptions right there good sir.

    Big portion of people are not perfectionists who care about few million isk or making jita alts. It's not that they are stupid they just don't care so someone who cares can haul that stuff and get a little bit isk for it. Also prices have historically gone comfortably up and down so you can make quite nice profit if you are not in hurry.

    It's not like it takes down eve economy but dumbing down everything doesn't seem best way to do it.

    I wouldn't expect much since afaik game has gone pretty much magical pony mode, no one even cares about belt rats anymore it just doesn't make money unless you are multiboxing supercapitals.

    First off, I tried to label all of my assumptions in there, but the main one is pretty much that people will continue to fail to read, transport PLEX stupidly, and thus lose expensive Kestrels. If that wasn't clear enough then consider this formal notification that I consider that to be an assumption on my part, but not a particularly far reaching one.

    After all you can't patch stupid.

    Also that note about PLEX prices has literally nothing to do with what I said, or with this change.

    Nothing here is being "dumbed down". If you put PLEX in your cargo it's going to be just as easy to lose, and only very very slightly easier to avoid doing that entirely if you know what you're doing at all remotely.

    You appear to have been somewhat misinformed about Belt Rats... those have never been a top-tier income activity and they still aren't. People playing around with Supers and Titans run Anomalies. Belt Ratting in Low and Null is still an intro PvE activity, just as it always has been in High Sec for ages, and people still do it when they can't or won't do Anoms, Missions, or any of the other dozen things that have always paid better.

  • Dev Blog: PLEX Rework - Follow Up in EVE Information Center

    Con Solo wrote:
    I'm not talking about activating PLEX or even purchasing PLEX for the purpose of activating. I'm talking about players who purchase PLEX w/real money to pump isk into their wallets. They will fill a buy order in their current system if they don't mind the loss of 20-30m when it means they don't have to travel all the way to Jita to get the best price. Of course they could just activate the PLEX on their alt and sell at Jita then transfer the isk. The fact that there is no way to transfer PLEX instantly creates a market where players either make that mistake, or when players pop someone moving PLEX and just want to liquidate in their current region no hassles. PLEX must remain exclusively a tangible movable object for purposes of buy orders. The margins between buys and sells, as well as regional disparity, will cease to exist if the Vault is introduced.

    This relies on a lot of assumptions, namely a lot of stupid and that aforementioned ignorance of mechanics, both of which seem unlikely to change as a result of the PLEX vault.

    First off, I'd be willing to bet that the vast majority of PLEX is already redeemed in Jita. That's where the best Buy price is, so the only reason to transport it somewhere else is to put up a Sell order. Any higher buy prices are likely scam orders or one of the above ignorant individuals. If you even have access to a station with such an order you can just redeem your PLEX there before selling it if you bought it with real money.

    On top of that this all relies on the aforementioned ignorance of the mechanics. Anyone, no matter how remotely located, can make a trade alt and buy stuff in Jita. It then takes a grand total of 10k ISK to contract that item to their main, at which point it can be remotely activated no matter where in the universe you are.

    In short, there's already basically no reason for these disparities to exist, but they still do, because people are bad at reading, game mechanics, and economics. None of these seem likely to change since nowhere in the dev blog do the lines "fixed stupid" appear.

  • Dev Blog: PLEX Rework - Follow Up in EVE Information Center

    Con Solo wrote:
    CCP Falcon wrote:
    Hey guys,

    Since the release of the PLEX Changes blog a few days back, we've been monitoring feedback, looking at suggestions from the community, and discussing internally what the best course of action is as we move forward with the changes that are coming to PLEX.

    Today we have a follow up blog from Team Size Matters for you guys, with a little additional information and a some key changes to how we intend to roll this out.

    Once again, thanks for the candid (and sometimes colorful) feedback and discussion over the course of the last few days. We're always open to listening to the concerns and suggestions of our pilots, and looking at ways we can continue to improve the EVE Universe with your help.

    Check out the Devblog here, and feel free to leave your feedback in this thread.

    You still have not allayed the concerns of many players with regards to the PLEX Vault. Giving pilots the ability to immediately transport PLEX through the galaxy renders the PLEX trade completely moot. PLEX price depends on what region it is sold for because of the risk involved in moving PLEX. Now the trade will be abused by characters who will transport PLEX instantaneously to be sold at other stations. The market will go flat.

    Please do not make PLEX a special Item. If you need to protect new players, give them a warning if they try to undock with PLEX. This protects new players without destroying player-driven markets. This as bad if not worse than the update that killed the booster smuggling aspect of the game. Please do not destroy existing organic game-play. Dumbing down the game will probably help retain new players, but it will dismantle the things that made Eve great to begin with- an organic player-driven universe.

    Recent changes have be concerned. I pay yearly subscriptions for the immersion. The arbitrary legality of boosters and the introduction of The Vault (aka hyper-spatial commodity teleporter) chips away at that immersion. With all the babying these updates are trying to accomplish, it is starting to feel more like a game than a wild space simulator.

    This already wasn't much of a concern, because it takes a few minutes and a character slot (and not even that now with Alphas) to buy a PLEX in Jita and then private contract it to your alt, at which point you can activate the PLEX remotely. It has been this way for *years*.

    The only people who need to pay something other than Jita prices for PLEX are people who aren't aware of this.

    The only people moving PLEX around are the few taking advantage of these few ignorant players (which probably won't change too much, let's be honest), RMTers intentionally losing PLEX to transfer ISK, and idiots.

    The only way this actually destroys your gameplay is if the vast majority of the playerbase suddenly starts reading available information, which seems unlikely.

  • Anti-Alpha mechanic? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Old Pervert wrote:
    A fair and valid criticism.

    Ultimately... I wish Eve pvp was more like TV. Groups of ships splitting off to engage each other, while the battle rages on, each a cog in a massive clock of death.

    Frigates dogfighting each other for superiority so as to harass larger ships (destroyers and up, assuming sufficient quantities of frigates)

    Destroyers and cruisers offering fire support for their frigates, or harassing larger ships (battlecruisers+)

    Battlecruisers offering fire support against dessies and cruisers, or harassing battleships

    Battleships offering fire support for BCs

    Capitals fighting capitals (and then wiping the floor with subcaps once the enemy capitals are gone)

    Supercapitals demolishing everything in their path, so long as they're properly supported.

    Then you've got the more specialized ships, T2 cruisers, T3 cruisers, etc, wreaking havoc on the enemy to disrupt and throw the whole mess into complete chaos.

    The only way I can see it happening is if it's no longer a valid strategy for the FC to broadcast one or two or three targets and then just tell the fleet to blap them. I mean, even sieged dreads can go poof very quickly. That's just no fun.

    Maybe how I want to see PVP end up (in a perfect world where it just is that way "because") is not a view supported by the majority. It just feels more interesting than "okay, everyone hop into machs, I want this many people to X up and fly logi". Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1. Ready, set, F1.

    The biggest problem with this is it's based entirely off Hollywood's idea of what a battle/war looks like, not anything realistic. Even just looking at WW2 naval battles you basically had Carriers and Battleships dominating everything. The few times a Battleship got half a piece of a smaller ship they basically one-shot them, and they didn't have a significant problem getting those hits.

    That's without even getting into Carriers whose planes pretty much wrecked everything and changed the face of naval combat completely from what people thought it would be like in 1938.

    Even in terms of ground combat actual war isn't particularly cinematic. More tactical, sure, because massed infantry is an arty/grenade/bomb magnet, but not particularly like what Hollywood thinks it's like.

    I'd also like to point out that your vision wouldn't be particularly fun for the majority of pilots. You say you want Supers and Titans to basically wreck everything. Then we're back to ~2014 where that was the case and major Alliances started using them like Battleships, just balling them up with a little support and blapping everything. Same goes for if Carriers and Dreads wreck everything, what you'll get is people only bringing what works.

    The only way to get the sort of fights you want is to basically remove player choice from the equation and force them to be like that, because a real fight where players get to pick and choose what they bring is only ever going to involve what works, whether that's Alpha-Machs, DPS Drakes/Caracals/Talos/Megas, or just balls of Caps and Supers.

    This isn't even a case of your opinion being different than the majority, what you want is just unrealistic to expect out of anything other than a largely scripted and single-player experience or a Hollywood movie.

  • Fleet formations in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This has been suggested a lot and there's just no practical reason to implement something like this. It would just increase server load when used for no actual benefit.

    Besides, if some advantage to more precise positioning was implemented then it shouldn't be automated, positioning should be something based on manual input rather than some automated system that makes you have to do even less to fly the ship.

  • Simulate Ship in fitting window. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Implementing something like this would be a pretty major change for CCP to make. The point of the in-game fitting tool isn't to replace these out of game tools because those tools are always going to be more feature rich and do the job better because that's what they're specifically designed to do.

  • Overview questions in EVE Communication Center

    Fluffy Moe wrote:

    What about the 1st part ? How can I make only the highlighted object, in this case gates or stations highlighted by the destination route, appear in overview without having its entire category ?

    I know I can do this with players and NPCs like I have it with my PVP and PVE tabs, that was pretty easy to figure out, but what about objects such as gates, stations, citadels ?

    There is no way to do this. The only ways to filter objects from the Overview are by Type (Gate, Station, ect) and by various statuses, which Gates and Stations do not have being entirely neutral objects.

    Personally I'd either just use a Travel tab or add the relevant bits to the overview, since if you sort by Distance the objects will end up all at the bottom generally being millions of KM or 1 AU or more away.

  • Inventory display regarding m3 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I'll be honest, I was expecting BS, but this actually makes a fair amount of sense. You might also consider posting this in the Little Things thread and maybe pinging CCP Karkur on Twitter if you can. This seems like right up her alley.

  • Low-sec Hopes and Changes in EVE Communication Center

    Vokan Narkar wrote:
    I think it was you who said I can use cyno inhibitor. So what will you do then if GC will have cyno inhib? Cyno off-grid and warp to them right?

    Most GCs are maintained by the large corps in LS such as Lowsechnaya, or FW-corps and they do not fear you will drop them because they can escalate far more than you can - they have everything prepared for it.

    It seems to me like all this is about is that you want to be able to destroy GCs of some random noob corps with easy. Which is hell simple with a t3 who can pass their gc, cloak, wait till they engage someone who comes and light a cyno.

    Btw cyno-inhib seems to be unavailable, either there is no demand (I had demand) or the demand is too high and the production is too low. Create it on my own is a no go, noo high PI prereqs for corp that doesn't specialize in industry. Also the price makes it inefficient - its cheaper to lose 2 cruisers in the drop than to pay for somehing that lasts 1 hour only, is visible on d-scan and has low area of effect with a limitation it can be anchored 75km off gate which means that all you need to do is to move 25km off gate in right direction to light a cyno. Useless piece of crap.

    Oh man this is a load of bad info.

    First off, the idea that most GCs in Low are maintained by massive entities that can out-escalate a null group dropping BLOPs is ridiculous. There are tons of small groups in low who gate camp at least occasionally, and most of the larger entities in Low are tiny and can drop, at best, a relatively small number of caps compared to a Null entity with more dreads in a standard drop-Cache than that Low entity can drop. They also don't have the bank to just shrug off a massive cap welp the same way a Null group can. That's not to say that a cap welp is gonna break the bank, but it's not nothing either.

    Also, FYI, Mobile Cyno inhibs aren't unavailable, they're just expensive and not that useful most of the time. If, for some reason, you feel the need to burn 63m you can buy them in Jita for a semi-reasonable price, Amarr for an unreasonable one, and a smattering of other systems for anywhere between reasonable and highway robbery.

    Also "just burning away from the gate" is laughable. First off, gate models are pretty big, second you pop in 10-15km off the thing in a random direction so you can actually end up having to burn about 40km to get out of the cyno inhib. By that point you're either dead or everyone's warped off, same for if you cyno in from off grid. Anyone who doesn't notice the local spike is either *hilariously* drunk or has no business leading a fleet.

    Also, those same big groups you're griping about, would probably be more than happy to see cynos restricted, because as Lan quite rightly pointed out they can avoid anything they can't take, or since they're the locals, they can *undock* their capitals, warp them to grid, and "begin dealing out merry hell on a democratic basis" to every non-blue on grid.

    The idea that anyone could view cynos being restricted in Low as a *nerf* to GCs is just... wat?

    Completely academic though, because CCP would need an amazingly compelling reason to even consider a change like that, and "why not?" isn't it.

  • Two ideas how to make alpha clones more playable. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Sonya Corvinus wrote:
    Do you feel you're not getting your $0/month out of your alpha clone?

    Easy solution, don't let alphas use a gnosis, and don't let them use gallente haulers. $10.95/mo is nothing. Buy a subscription.

    This is... really not true for everyone. When I started playing the cost of an Eve sub was most of my discretionary spending for the month (I was young) and not everyone with a computer that can play Eve can just casually drop ~$120-180 a year.

    While I generally agree that Alphas should be limited, for balance at the very least, I don't agree that they should be completely neglected on the balance front, and this sort of attitude that seems to say "Alpha players should be irrelevant" doesn't do the game or the playerbase any favors.

  • Anti-Alpha mechanic? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Couple of things here.

    First off, it's fairly rare that everyone in a salvo *actually* lands within one tick. It sounds simple but between the way the server splits hairs, coms delay, latency, that one idiot who goes on "two", and everything else this wouldn't do that much for large fleet alpha. At worst you make FCs say "everyone with a name above 'L' go on 1, everyone else on zero" and we're back to about the same for most really large fleet fights.

    Also this wouldn't significantly affect Armor vs Shield tanking. On two fits with about the same buffer you'd still be out of your shields and armor and sitting at 100% hull. If you get saved then the 'secondary tank' is still gone and you're gonna poof on the next full salvo.

    The only thing this would really affect is fleets that are on the edge of being able to alpha a target, at which point you've just made the difference between space dust and largely wasted damage the timing of the server tick, which would be *really* frustrating to deal with. At that point you're basically deciding whether someone lives or dies based on a really arbitrary and disconnected RNG system.

    Oh and you haven't accounted for any reps that land on the same tick as damage being counted against the damage after resists.

    Also any nerf to Logistics to account for this would likely just push people *more* towards alpha setups with less Logi since nerfing Logi to account for alpha would make them almost worthless the rest of the time.

    Personally it's not that I'm terribly in favor of alpha setups, if we could incentivize fights to largely take place below that threshold I'd be pretty happy, I just think this is a horrible ham-fisted solution akin to dropping a 500lb bomb on a fly. It's messy, needlessly destructive, has tons of collateral damage in the form of Logi and larger ships that don't currently need a nerf, and probably won't even fix the problem because damage rarely happens all on one tick anyway.

  • Change price warning dialogue mechanics in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Double check your orders and read the warning instead of clicking through it.

    As much as I'm a fan of functional UI and removing UI related errors wherever possible this isn't a UI issue, this is a 'player is moving too quickly and not double checking' issue. Otherwise known as 'user error'.

    The 'outside of regional average' warning is there for newbies more than experienced players. It exists as much to stop newbies buying stupidly marked up modules as to assist market traders from making mistakes. Changing it to work how you're suggesting would remove that functionality since if I've bought up all of the Meta-whatever modules of a particular type and re-listed them then no warning would be generated.

    CCP could change it to 're-type the intended price' instead of just an OK button and people would just complain that that takes too much time.

  • 3rd Party non-browser app and OAuth2 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Hi, you may have more luck asking in the Eve Technology Lab. If you want to just have this thread moved you can report it and ask the ISDs to move it to that forum.

    You may want to try developing for ESI rather than CREST as CREST is going away at some point.

  • Two ideas how to make alpha clones more playable. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    1. Personally I agree this is non-optimal and could be improved on, but this could be more easily fixed by just allowing every clone to train every Racial Industrial to 1.

    2. Gotta disagree with this. Mining will never be super profitable, even for an Alpha. The Venture is *waaaay* better than the old starter racial mining Frigates and Cruisers that people used to start out with. The issue here is that people expect mining to be very profitable when that's just not going to be the case. The profit of mining is always kept in check by the incomes of the people who buy the ships mining creates. If mining ever becomes more profitable than other income sources then more people move into Mining and that pushes the profitability down. See: Recent Rorqual induced mineral price crash for reference.

  • [March] Balance Tweaks: Fighters, Supercarriers & Burst Projectors in EVE Technology and Research Center

    March rabbit wrote:
    Tested this new patch with my supercarrier.

    Nothing really changed. And it was expected more or less having 1 Haven being done in 5:30. Most of the time NPC targeted my fighters but it is too fast for them to do any significant damage anyway.

    So this change mainly targeted carrier pilots. And i'm still not convinced that they needed it What?

    Doesn't seem to have even affected Carriers much beyond multi-box/AFK capability. So far I've seen no change from people ratting Blood Raiders, Sansha, Guristas, Rogue Drones, and Serpentis. Haven't been able to find a video or person who does Angels though and there's been some concern raised over their TPs and Webs. If anyone has a video with the changes I'm curious if the concerns with Angels have been as overblown as those with other factions.