EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-03-17 14:21
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-07-21 04:02
  • Number of Posts: 5,917
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Nevyn Auscent

Security Status 5.0
  • Broke Sauce Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Dev blog: Increased Skill Injector Flexibility Coming On May 23rd in EVE Information Center

    Tipa Riot wrote:

    We already crossed the line and left it far behind ... and the game still lives. The amount of your char's SP is determined just by your wallet or the ability to make ingame ISK, the connection to time was cut the moment skill injectors were introduced.

    Except that never was true ever since the Character Bazaar was implemented, SP trading is actually a more honest form of it than the Bazaar since the character never trades hands meaning people don't get confused by new owners.

  • PLEX after change: in EVE Communication Center

    Vampyr wrote:

    You think EVE has 'hundreds of thousands' of players?

    Statistically EVE has somewhere between 200k & 300k players.
    Average accounts per player is about 1.5 per CCP's released stats a year or so ago, and per their financial reports they have somewhere between 300k & 400k accounts, people crunched numbers.
    So yes actually, EVE does.

    If memory serves CCP at some point also released information which indicated that only about 10% of accounts paid by plex. Was somewhere around the same time as they released the stats on how many times a plex typically changed hands before actually getting used.

  • did plex get more expensive? in EVE Communication Center

    Your argument is akin to me saying 'I only wanted 5 plex, but to get 5 plex under the old system cost me $105, so 5 plex cost too much'. Or more accurately the 7 plex method I listed above where per plex it costs more than 6.
    The cheaper 'Per plex' way is just buy the next larger package.
    If you mix & match smaller packages to make an exact value then obviously it's going to cost you more than a single big package.

    That does not mean that Plex are more expensive on the whole, that means you are attempting to pick a very specific example where if you buy EXACTLY a certain number of plex across several packages it costs more.

    So your complaint here is nothing to do with the price per plex, and all to do with CCP not offering a 6 old plex package anymore.

  • did plex get more expensive? in EVE Communication Center

    Except you are still deliberately picking the most expensive way to do it by attempting to exactly match that number
    And failing at basic literacy as to what I actually said.

    The price has not gone up per plex, they have just changed the package sizes and the new size no longer suits you.

  • did plex get more expensive? in EVE Communication Center

    But only if you buy exactly (or as close to exactly) 6 plex as possible, rather than just stepping up to the next pack size and getting more than 6 plex.
    It's the same as if you argued that with old plex 7 Plex cost more per plex than 6 because you had to buy a single plex for $20 to add the 7th.

    I.E. It's an utter strawman argument.

  • did plex get more expensive? in EVE Communication Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:


    you couldn't that's his point. in his mind its okay that plex cost more now because you can buy less

    But Plex don't cost more.
    If you look for a specific value of plex at which the packages no longer suit sure you can find a situation where you have to spend more. But on the whole the plex price is equivalent to the old price.
    The structure of where the 'bonus' plex are is different because Bonus are now measured from the 'more expensive' $5 option. Not the $20 500 plex option. But that is a marketing spin visual, not an actual difference.

  • The degraded and forgotten ships. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:

    there is nothing wrong with making the choice to fit undersized guns they do not need the ability to swap from shooting frigs to other BBs on the fly. build your fleet around the BB they are not meant to be solo ships. brings ships good at hitting small ones or slowing them down and fit large guns to your BB otherwise fit smaller guns to your BB and laugh when frigs and cruisers think they have found an easy kill.

    *pat pat*
    And this attitude is why BB's have been lost from 95% of the meta, & why it is now Cruisers online. (Or T3D online depending)

  • The degraded and forgotten ships. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:


    you know you can just put undersized guns onto the BB right? and since they have more slots and more PG/CPU generally do get more DPS than ships bonused to those guns?

    BBs are not meant to just be simply better than smaller ships they are a different tool for a different job

    You can, but at that point they suck for their big hitter role. (Ignoring stuff like RLML here as a known unbalanced item)
    My idea doesn't make them better than small ships because small ships still have the massive advantage of mobility, but what it does is give them a way to apply DPS that will be slightly less than a Frigate/Cruiser to said frigate cruiser, without murdering their primary role.
    At that point you are trading mobility for EHP, rather than the current situation which has led to T3D's online, where you are trading so many things just for EHP that it becomes not worth it. Frigates will still be able to pick their engagements, and I am specifically saying that Large guns/missiles should become worse against small ships for this idea as well, so only your small guns are effective.

    @Blade. CCP's implementation of balance is bad yes, but their ability to recognise that something needs balancing is actually pretty good. They just fail at the 'how' quite often. T3 will not increase Battleship use though, it will increase T2 Cruiser use instead.

  • The Dodixie Stock Exchange Experiment in EVE Technology and Research Center

    But scam.
    Because CEO's can just invent new shares as long as they keep majority. And if they don't keep majority all their assets can be stolen
    So which way the scam goes depends on the CEO and what they know.

  • did plex get more expensive? in EVE Communication Center

    A couple of the packs changed value I think, most of them didn't though, but they all got calculated in base value from the new smallest package which is more expensive. (And before was far too small to be bought). So it looks like plex changed value on a lot of packs since the 'bonus' amount changed.

  • The degraded and forgotten ships. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Blade Darth wrote:
    Small ammo in large turrets- 1/10. There is something as under caliber ammo but it has the same rate of fire and "tracking" issues.
    t1 bs are in healthy place and have very good variety (shield/ armor + solo/fleet variants and other mix) and Rokh is a fantastic shield brick for fleet fights, only reason it's not used is because faction bpo's are being farmed to death and too cheap (mineral cost is similar).

    When CCP themselves have said that BS are not in a healthy place in the overall Meta, you trying to claim they are shows a serious lack of understanding.
    However it may be that a direct buff is not the way ideal forward.

    Given I can't think of a fit that actually uses oversize guns, and only a few that use under-size gins, my preference would be to make gun slots size locked, and do something like give BS their current number of large guns, 4 medium guns & 2 small guns. Then make tracking small ships even harder for medium & large guns (Before this accuracy BS I'd have done it by just giving them a target sig radius/gun sig radius chance of hitting even a stationary target, but I'm sure you could do it)
    Designating slots as potential utility could also be done to prevent this being 6 extra utility slots, make the only possible use M & S guns or empty. PG probably doesn't need to change at all since it would give additional reasons to use the smaller L gun sizes & RCU's. CPU obviously would need to change.

    This gives a BS similar fire-power vs a frigate that another frigate has, similar vs a cruiser that another cruiser has, but still heavy fire-power vs BS ^ larger.
    It's certainly a more complex & difficult approach, but CCP have shown us that we are no longer tied to the H/M/L slots only with Citadels, and there is room on the UI for that also. (UI I imagine being like a slive of pie, with the M & S slots inside the wheel of the current H slots, but locked to guns only)
    And it seems a much more intuitive way forward than just trying to buff BS in a direct fashion.

  • PROPOSAL: New purpose for Mobile Siphons in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So basically a return to passive mining, since the owner would use them on their own field instead.
    How about NO!

  • PLEX on Amazon in EVE Communication Center

    You might want to post this in the feedback thread, probably more Dev attention there than here.

  • Dev blog: PLEX Changes On The Way! in EVE Information Center

    Steijn wrote:


    For me they didnt ruin my wallet, they just removed a player from their game. Plex above a certain level just isnt worth it personally so when my current time added via the Plex from Aurum expires, i'll be gone again.

    I was a player that had something like 6 years continuos sub, but stupid mechanic/game changes over the past 2 years made me completely lose interest. So for all those that say vets never leave as they have you by the short and curlies once addicted, let me tell you that p**ss a player off enough with stupid changes and they will go for good.

    Except CCP don't & never have controlled the in game isk price for plex. That is player controlled, so you are putting blame on entirely the wrong people.

  • My ideas on how to make Hi-Sec more Secure against Gankers & Criminals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Hiasa Kite wrote:
    [quote]
    You need to read James 315's manifesto, in addition to learning game mechanics.

    That 'manifesto' is the largest joke ever, written purely to victim blame rather than being able to admit they just want to gank for the LOLS. Lets not advertise that as something that ever should be listened to.

  • My ideas on how to make Hi-Sec more Secure against Gankers & Criminals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    You want to be able to defend against gankers, you want a LONGER timer before they get Concorded. The longer the timer the more likely you are to be able to defend against them, because they will bring the right number of ships for the timer (give or take some slack margin)

  • The downside of alpha clones in EVE Communication Center

    wow, bunch of ostrich's here who love to blame other people.

    As has been said by a few here already, this is nothing new, EVE's UI is terrible for things like loading ammo inside station, it doesn't have any obvious way of doing so, no visible ammo box, or reload icon or anything like that.
    The drag & drop in station is a hidden feature.
    Harassing people for missing a hidden feature is down right abuse and not ok, and by doing so all you do is demonstrate how immature the current EVE community actually is.

    If you tell them and they then ask again tomorrow, then sure, remind them you told them yesterday and abandon them to their fate if they can't remember a basic skill once taught. But don't abuse people for not knowing about a hidden feature with no prompt.

  • Wreck Hunting Ship + Mini Game in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Wrecks already show on Dscan last I checked, and it doesn't make that impossible. So they can show on probes.

  • Relocate systems map entities? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This would explode everyone's bookmarks in quite a bad way if they moved all the objects around, ditto everyone's PI set ups if they changed planet types to appropriate bands.
    Planet types 'might' be possible if they ever redid how PI worked as everyone would need to redo their PI already.

  • Idea: Purchasables (Attribute Remap, Character Rename) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    If you want to change name, extract skills, biomass, Inject skills.
    Oh look, there is your SP sink idea part of it.
    You just have to put up with starting a totally new character as part of that, and losing all that age and history.

    So, given it can be done, why does it need to be made easier & cheaper?
    Personally characters should be locked to players, not sellable even, so you can't buy history either.

    That sort of stuff needs to be more important than it is, not less.