EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2014-03-03 05:31
  • First Forum Visit: 2014-06-24 16:54
  • Number of Posts: 437
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Chance Ravinne

Security Status -1.5
  • WiNGSPAN Delivery Services Member since
  • WiNGSPAN Delivery Network Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dior Ambraelle wrote:
    Here is an idea that most likely will break everything, and would probably require to change the current approach, but I just want to leave it here.

    Rare, pirate faction subsystems.

    One subsystem of each type, these would need the involved factions skills, and could be fit to the involved factions' ships only.
    Concord subsystems could be fit on all 4 ships, the SOE defensive subsystem would give cloak and a good tank, Proteus and Tengu cold have Mordu's Legion's long range scram, while Loki and Legion could benefit from the Blood Raiders' neuter/nosfer bonus.


    That sounds both really fun and HILARIOUSLY BROKEN hahaha

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lightbringer wrote:
    Does the stupid faction BS Nerf take into account this just as stupid nerf aswell?


    Yesterday people complained the Battleship nerf would make Carriers the default king of the meta. Now CCP is dealing with Carriers and people want to cry?

    My assumption is they are pushing towards T1 battleships

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The crazy conspiracy theories about SP loss being maintained for infinite financial gain are just nuts. If CCP was that greedy for injector cash they would have given T3Ds SP loss. Nobody would have batted an eye.

    Anyway the SP loss is no longer a good balancing factor. Just remove it and increase base hull cost instead.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jeremiah Saken wrote:
    Those are subsystems bonuses. What are the base hull stats? We need to know what values we are adding by subs.

    Local rep strenght on covert subsystem is per level? Make covert subsytem split bonuses between active/passive tank subsystem - both but half the value for example: 5% rep and 2,5% raw HP.

    Edit: I would rather see jackdaw missile bonuses rather than kinetic lock on Tengu.


    I'd rather see the covops defensive bonuses split by ship than have it be split 50/50 for every ship. It's a guaranteed way to end up with a terrible final tank. If you have to change it, make 2 active and 2 passive instead.

  • Strategic Cruiser Focus Group Working Thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Gonna need more time to look this over, but at initial glance I am VERY excited about the covert ops possibilities with these options. My greatest reserve has been that the changes would present no compelling reason to ever fly a T3C over a Stratios for cloaky hunting (not HK-ing), and my fears are allayed.

    There are going to be some REALLY COOL fits here. Have to take this to the lab for a bit but I am hugely optimistic about at least this angle of the changes.

    Thank you for sharing, Fozzie!

    PS: I really like the overheat/paste theme

  • Solo PVP in wormholes - Weapon of choice, fitting and methods? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Keep in mind with the upcoming T3C changes and the introduction of the CONCORD covops ships, the meta will get shaken up A LOT!

  • Solo PVP in wormholes - Weapon of choice, fitting and methods? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Stratios is undisputedly the best ship possible for solo wormhole hunting.


    • Scan bonus to map chains and locate targets fast
    • Easily fit to shield buffer, armor buffer, active armor, or even hull tank
    • Drones do high application damage and flexibility
    • High slot freedom for neuts (recommended) or lasers
    • Huge number of mids for your choice of EWAR
    • Cant take on almost any ship 1:1 from frigate to most Battlecruisers
    • Looks incredibly sexy, especially with the WINGSPAN Firecell SKIN

  • Use Randomization and Contract Slots to Make the Bounty System FUN in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cade Windstalker wrote:
    So, another 'allow bounties to get around CONCORD in High Sec' idea to "improve" the bounty system?

    So, first problem here, what's to stop someone from cycling through this with alts?


    This is answered in your next question:

    Quote:
    There are something like a couple million active or semi-active characters in the game


    If you have a cap of 3 or 4 characters, it would probably take you several thousand accounts of rolling before you got what you wanted. Good luck!

    Also, it has been suggested elsewhere that there are tiers of bounties. So if you are a Level I Bounty Hunter (maybe Alphas are limited to this), you cannot accept bounties past a certain value. The only way to raise your Hunter License Level would be to complete bounties, which you wouldn't have on hundreds of alts.

  • Use Randomization and Contract Slots to Make the Bounty System FUN in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Danika Princip wrote:
    So what happens when all of your bounty slots are unsubbed, jita alts, titan pilots, cyno alts and/or AFK cloakers? You know, people you can't actually kill as a highsec bounty hunter? Especially if you don't have the LP required to cycle to new targets?


    You wait. Fortunately this is easily tweakable to be any number of slots, and any length of cooldown necessary to be fair. Too many Titan alts? Increase number of slots, or shorten duration of contracts.

  • Use Randomization and Contract Slots to Make the Bounty System FUN in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I've put together a video to explain my thoughts on a relatively simple bounty hunting system that would replace and improve the existing (and unfun) system.

    HERE IS THE VIDEO

    The system, for anyone who doesn't want to watch, is based on two things: Contract Slots and Randomization.

    Instead of bounties being open to anyone (and therefore being easily game-able and offering no "hunting"), players have Bounty Contract Slots that they can go to a CONCORD office to fill. When they request a bounty, they are assigned a target AT RANDOM out of ALL BOUNTIES and given a time limit to find and kill that person.

    They can take out multiple bounties at once, but there would be a slot limit to prevent anyone from "rolling" through bounties until finding someone favorable (like their alt, or a corpmate). You could only roll new bounties by completing the previous ones, or potentially by paying LP tied to previous successful bounties.

    If/when they kill their target, they would receive the full payment for ONE bounty against that person. So if 30 people put 1 billion ISK bounties on the target, the killer would get 1 billion ISK, and the number of slots the target has in the system would drop from 30 to 29. When it reaches zero, they cannot be hunted. There would be a hard cap on the number of people who can simultaneously be assigned to any one person.

    In order to prevent collusion, there would be a non-ISK incentive for the target to kill the hunter. It could be, for instance, that killing your hunter makes you immune to bounties for a month. Or it grants you LP with a certain faction. Or it causes your hunter to experience SP loss. This will reduce the odds a hunter would be willing to trust the target in an attempt to split the prize. However, collusion would not necessarily be seen as an absolute evil, as it adds another layer of dynamic and backstab potential.

    A very good discussion of the pros and cons of this system has started on Reddit, here. The main concerns seem to be around collusion and crimewatch, with many potential fixes proposed, including the implementation of a "kill right" like engagement timer, or the temporary reinstatement of the non-mutual watch list, or delayed concord response, or a suspect timer for various bounty related actions.

    What do you think?

  • [Summer] RLML and HML balance pass in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Agreed with others, the RLML issue is more the burst damage during the clip, the long reload is almost inconsequential if you delete your target before you ever need to reload. Decreasing clip size so that rapid launchers are still good to delete ships downclass, but not a no-brainer versus same-size or higher opponents, is probably a better idea. It would make same-size missiles a more obvious "sustainable" DPS solution versus downsized missiles as a utility pick.

  • [May] CONCORD Aerospace Promotional Ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I know everyone is waiting anxiously for feedback from the CEO of EVE's #1 covert ops corporation.

    Here it is: These ships are too interesting and unique to be limited only to players who have excess dollars and PTOs to spare on exotic, live EVE events.

    I'm not saying they shouldn't be limited. But there's a difference between Genolution limited and "I had a couple thousand dollars lying around, so now I own this ship" limited.


  • Trilambda Feature Feedback - Suns, Hangars and Logos! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    If you do a CEO overlay, having text with it would be cool. If it's just a portrait, new players might not know what it means.

    (IMAGE HERE)
    Mister Bigshot
    CEO, Your Average EVE Corp
    Last Online: 204 days

  • Does Scan deviation effect initial signiture position? in EVE Gameplay Center

    The best way to check this would be to go to the same system with two characters (one highly skilled and the other not) and compare their probe maps.

  • Does Scan deviation effect initial signiture position? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Great question, gonna tag this because I'd like to know as well.

    Also curious if certain levels of Astrometric Acquisition are basically worthless due to server tick rounding.

  • Announcing the WINGSPAN Torpedo OutReach Program in EVE Communication Center

    Sonya Corvinus wrote:
    living in j-space for years, I've yet to run into wingspan. then again, I don't pay much attention to daytrippers who don't actually live in j-space.


    Statistically speaking, a 2-person corporation would be unlikely by sheer odds of running into any particular group. But leave the porch light on and we'll see what we can do. Cheers!

  • [March] Character's Total Net Worth estimation in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The smugposts are going to be REAL.

    10/10, thanks CCP!

  • [March] Structure, Drone & Fighter improvements from Team Five 0 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Great changes. Looking forward to easier Stratios piloting. THANK YOU!

  • Zkill guide to Running for CSM 12 by rhiload in Council of Stellar Management

    Quote:
    I would instead draw comparisons between rhiload and CSM 10 member WingspannTT (Chance Ravinne) who demonstrated how youtube popularity without any substance to back it up, makes for a hollow and useless CSM member.


    Seriously Hyde? Useless CSM member? I think if you take a step back and consider that literally a third of CSM X quit, boycotted CSM, got removed, or were implicated in some kind of scandal, it's pretty insulting and petty to use me as an example of a useless CSM.

    Why don't you spend 10 minutes thinking about how useful all the "vets" of CSM X were who literally were so bad they disappeared or got kicked before using me as an example of uselessness. Some of them straight up went AWOL and left EVE, but somehow I'm the bad guy.


    • When Citadels were going to have features that would RUIN wormhole space I pushed (along with Corbexx) for their removal.
    • When literally nobody on CSM understood how missile damage application worked I lobbied hard to try to bring Missile Guidance Comps and the associated Rigor Catalyst nerfs to a reasonable point
    • When the new probing system was being put into place I pushed back again and again and again to get every fix possible made that wormholers and explorers were asking for
    • When the camera was completely SCREWED I sat with CCP and Jayne for several hours to walk them through community feedback on solo, fleet, and videomaking issues
    • Don't even get me started on just straight up trying to be a positive productive member while dealing with pretty much the most toxic CSM environment of all time
    • That stupid bracket for your own ship was part of my UI QOL agenda...
    • Did I mention that I actively and positively contributed to CSM all friggin year?


    I don't believe in calling people out by name, but there were legitimately veteran players on CSMX that didn't know how attributes affect skill point gain. Meanwhile they ranted just as loud about how injectors should work. There were veterans that responded to MAYBE 10% of the feedback posts in Confluence, even on issues they in theory knew about. When we had a branding/advertising exercise, one well-loved CSM flat out refused to participate on some unimaginable grounds. But you know, I'm the problem, right?

  • Nullification and Interdiction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    STEVE I'm sure you remember one year ago on CSM X we sat in CCP's offices and asked for bubbles to have shorter lifespans (1 to 2 days) AND to generate killmails a la modern structures.

    These things are out of control. They pollute gates and get lost in random w-space pockets, never to be scanned down or cleared (no incentive). There is no way they were ever intended to be used in the dozens/hundreds on gates, lasting weeks and weeks, or cluttering up w-space dscan for just as long.

    Give them a way to expire faster or give people a reason to MAKE them expire!!!

    Love,
    Chance

Forum Signature

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT