EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2009-08-22 17:31
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-04-02 19:45
  • Number of Posts: 139
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Jin alPatar

Security Status 1.9
  • Entertainment 7wenty Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • [March] Rorqual and Mining changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    • Initial activation of the PANIC module would require the Rorqual to have an active target lock on an asteroid.

    Can you make the targeted asteroids blow up when PANIC is activated? Otherwise it feels too much like an arbitrary limitation with no basis in lore.

  • jEveAssets 4.1.2 (2017-06-07) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I read the last few pages and didn't see this feature request:

    Would you consider adding Skill points as an asset and mathing extractor + injector costs to translate to a value?

  • [December] Command Destroyers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Rise wrote:

    restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec

    Can we give the MJFG an option to be scripted to work like a normal MJD that can be used in HiSec?

  • We want your SOV little things! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Instead of a "Vulnerability Window" can we rename it to a "Maintenance Window"? It would make a little more sense 'lore-wise' why this time period exists.

    Also be interesting if the time depended somewhat on the size of the holding entity. So huge entities take longer to run maintenance checks and are thus vunerable longer than small entities.

  • hold everything if you have too but make THIS change please in EVE Technology and Research Center

    How often exactly are you writing passionate emails in-game?

  • POSes: I am a small portion of the community in Council of Stellar Management

    Two step wrote:

    Respectfully (because you are a giant and can crush me), I think you misinterpreted my post.

    What I said was:
    1) CCP has decided to not do modular POSes all at once
    2) CCP has not decided what they will be working on this Summer
    3) CCP did say that modular POSes would matter for only a small population of players

    What I am trying to do with my blog post and this thread is demonstrate to CCP that #3 is wrong, and that POSes should be a part of the summer expansion (#2).

    Thank you. This.

    This isn't about the players thinking this is easy to do or that it was said it would never happen. The problem is the reason--that POSes affect a minority of the playerbase.

    We disagree. It affects large numbers.

  • POSes: I am a small portion of the community in Council of Stellar Management

    ash veratis wrote:
    the notion that poses only affect a small portion of the eve population is ludicrous at best.

    If it's even remotely true, then it's only happened because the existing POS system is the most broken piece of EVE.


    It's already been said but I'll add my voice: Make POSes something everyone wants to own and subscribers will increase. Make POSes something useful that almost everyone CAN own and subscribers will go through the roof.

  • Making mining make sense (visual and gameplay suggestions) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Eliniale wrote:

    Another thing that bothers me is that planetary rings are just a flat plane with very little to them. Ideally you'd want these rings to look like chunks of rock and dust.

    Actually .... planetary rings are almost entirely made up of very find dust. Most particles are measure on the micrometer scale. There are a few moons and some larger asteroidish objects, but they are very few and far between.

    Ring mining should actually be more like Gas Harvesting than Asteroid Mining.

    With that said, Good Ideas! +1

  • [Retribution 1.1] Combat Battlecruisers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This doesn't really seem to fit with how the smaller ship tiericide went. If each race had 3 battlecruisers, why not give them 3 different roles?

    With these changes we'll have 2 combat BCs and a big gun attack BC.

    Seeing as BCs are intended to use gang links and form the platform for dedicated command ships, why not treat one of these like you did with logistic frigs & cruisers?

    Make the "Tier 1" BCs combat ships as you've outlined (though drop the active tank bonus for Gallente) and make the "Tier 2" BCs "Command Ships Lite"

    I'd assume the lite/entry command ships would get a good buffer bonus (7.5% bonus to resists vs 5%), no damage bonus, and either a bonus to a gang link or the ability to run 3 without a bonus. (or something else, you're the designers, not me)

    TL;DR: It seems non-tiericidish to make all BCs direct combat focused when they have a history with Gang Links.

  • [Retribution 1.1] Combat Battlecruisers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer effectiveness

    Please rethink this part. Active local tank bonuses are not competitive with the resist bonus.

  • Dont change the 2/10 plexes! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Would it be possible to have a "deactivated beacon" in DED complexes that a player can activate once they're scanned down?

    Once activated they can act like Faction Warfare beacons that show up on everyone's overview. Then corporations that like using these for size controlled fights can scan, warp, and activate beacons.

    I think it would also be useful to *not* allow players to DE-activate beacons and have activated beacons prevent the deadspace area from despawning until downtime.

    I think this is obviously more difficult than Fozie's suggestion but keeps the things most people want. Exploration is still needed, there are still rewards in these DED complexes, and they can be used to control ship sizes in specific areas.


  • [Proposal] - Filters for Local - Reduce the spam in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The 500 person block limit is too small. One way we could combat the spam in local chat (especially in Jita) would be to let us create filters.

    So instead of blocking everyone that's copy/pasting 'snow', I could filter the text string. If I don't want to see ads, I could filter "WTS".


  • Whom should I bounty? in EVE Communication Center



    Best of the Worst:

  • faction tower price increase? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Smohq Anmirorz wrote:
    Grammar is only bad when it does not communicate its meaning. In this case it still carried its meaning, there was no other interpretation.

    This part depends on the reader. When I read I see words, I don't hear the sounds.

    So when I tried to make my way through that sentence my brain made this:

    "Is this .. do the blueprints for the towers get taken out of the game?"

    Do and Due sound exactly the same, but the meanings are so different that my brain can't replace one with the other. I honestly didn't know the OP mean "Due" until I read Zhilia's post.

    So for me, the sentence as written did NOT communicate it's meaning.

  • Future of marauders? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Jacob Holland wrote:

    The Kronos wants to be good with Blasters - the web bonus, the Megathron hull; it just looks at you as if to say "I can haz Neutrons plox"...
    But even with Neutrons, Null and Fed Navy webs it takes forever to run a lot of missions with it solo, simply because you're spending so long travelling between targets, running an MWD and also having to tank (which isn't good for the cap).

    In other people's missions, as a damage plough, it can be awesome however, because the targets are orbitting them rather than you and there's a lot less trundling around, simply web a couple of big BS, close and melt their faces then move on. Of course that changes with Retribution and the "improved 'rat AI"...

    Kronos w/ 425 Rails is the way to go with Javelin for 'close' targets and Thorium for far targets. I never need to move more than 20km from warp in / accel gate.

    Sure, a similiarly fit Vindicator does 10% more dps (while using double the ammo) but the Kronos has a 55% better tank.

  • Megathron or Hyperion for Missions. in EVE Gameplay Center

    How far from the Kronos are you? (it gets the best of all 3. Great looks of the mega, armor bonus of the hyperion, and damage of the vindicator.)

    But otherwise I'd train T2 RAILs and use Javelin. That's my go to. The tracking bonus of Javelin in nice with pretty sick damage.

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

    CCP Fozzie wrote:
    What you are describing is a side effect of the change:
    Removed non-capital skill requirements from capital remote assistance modules. (Shield Emission Systems, Energy Emission Systems, Remote Hull Repair Systems and Remote Armor Repair Systems)

    We are currently in the process of refactoring the way skills and effects apply to capital modules.

    In this case the gang links had previously been affecting Capital Remote Armor Repair Systems but not Capital Shield Transporters. This change brought the armor reps in line with the shield variants.

    We may re-evaluate this going forward, either through changes to the gang boost modules or possibly to the triage mod, but we can't guarantee anything at this point.

    Wow, you really didn't want us to know about this before the patch, did you? That's the only conclusion I can draw as such a huge change would have every reason to be explicitly spelled out in the patch notes & blogs leading up to the expansion.

  • NON warp-capable Ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    +1 interesting mechanic.

  • Warning if undocking with cargo worth alot? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Souisa wrote:

    People are probably gonna hate me for this suggestion, but maybe there should be a warning when undocking with cargo that is worth much more than the actual ship. It would be good for newbies, because i bet they will leave the game if they get surprise ganked while carrying all of their hard earned stuff with insufficent tank or planning

    Seriously, Souisa. You have the worst ideas.

  • In need of a new freighter tier. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Given the decreasing cost of alpha damage (ie: tier 3 battlecruisers) it makes sense for the rest of the universe to adapt.

    It seems reasonable for either another tech II freighter that is EHP focused with somewhat less hauling capacity (75% of base?). Or another tier of frieghter that has higher EHP at the expense of capacity (50% - 60% of base?)