EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2008-03-22 16:20
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-10-10 14:48
  • Number of Posts: 954
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Retar Aveymone

Security Status -10.0
  • DJ's Retirement Fund Member since
  • Goonswarm Federation Member since

Last 20 Posts

be honest, did you make the PANIC module a mining laser in some hilarious internal work-around for this issue

  • [December] Ending the deployment of new outposts and upgrades in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ripard Teg wrote:
    CCP Lebowski wrote:
    I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here! P

    I think the real question that is not being answered: "What is the rush?"

    Why is there a rush to remove the ability to anchor outposts when you don't have a replacement for some of the functionality that outposts provide, except "live somewhere else"? Why December 13, and not "next summer" or at some later point when the new structures are more functional and more polished?

    because all of 0.0 has way more than enough outposts for all your ship insurance and module repairing needs

  • [December] Ending the deployment of new outposts and upgrades in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
    Feature parity: a few items.

    A control tower does not broadcast its presence in a solar system with an in-space icon visible to all players. When jumping into a new system, without needing to click d-scan, we can look in space for blue icons, and quickly determine that a new Citadel has started anchoring.

    Separately, Overview (not in-space) Citadel icons are not supposed to be visible to players who are not in the access list. But (I think) due to the order of operations that occur in a session change, we frequently get to see all the citadel icons on the overview for just a second, until they are quickly removed from view because we don't have access.

    A control tower can be online, with guns anchored able to defend itself in much less than 24 hours. The fact Citadels require 24 hours to anchor has been very good for conflict generation, but made them much harder to sneak into a solar system un-noticed, when compared to a small control tower. Especially when combined with icons visible in space.

    A control tower increases its defense ability with each new player able to control its anchored weapons. That is traditional MMO game design: more players is better. I understand the decision the team made to simplify the control scheme and make it just like a ship, and its a very cool experience for the ONE player who can get to do it, in a battle at a Citadel.

    a control tower emails its location to the sov owner as soon as you anchor it, and the guns on a pos might as well not exist for all the good they do in any actual combat

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    alternatively, the invincible rorquals could have dropped a bit of the structure tank for cap mods because, you know, they're invincible

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    "you see, my cap management was difficult because i fit my invincible rorqual poorly, this means it's well balanced!"

  • [December] Ending the deployment of new outposts and upgrades in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Lebowski wrote:
    Thanks for that response, appreciate you taking the time to highlight that again. I'll bring this up with the team and see if we can get some traction on it, at the very least in the form of an official statement on this subject.

    im going to be real blunt here: the reason that the team hasn't been responding to these guys is because they are not going to be happy with anything short of the best highsec production facilities for 100m isk that are completely wardec-immune

    small pos as production is broken as all hell and everyone who looked at it knows it, and there's no lack of clarity. there's just a small group of people complaining they're not getting what they want

  • [December] Ending the deployment of new outposts and upgrades in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Tom Stonehoof wrote:
    We had the summer of rage (2012), guess it's time for the winter of passive aggressiveness/Mild Rage (2016).

    This is basically Incarna all over again in regards to resource allocation and implementing features that the player base has had rather vocal opposition to.

    the player base, with tiny exceptions, has been strongly pro-cits and pro-ecs

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Tarsas Phage wrote:
    Querns wrote:
    Tarsas Phage wrote:

    Here's the thing - I was one of the Rorq pilots on the D-W beacon


    "I'm one of the most prolific abusers of this mechanic, so let me tell you why it's not abuse"


    It's certainly a more informed vantage point than 99% of GSF who are just parroting the company line. In the mean time, keep jumping your ratting-fit supers into PVP situations whose only hope is to kill the thing tackling it if things go south. Damn, if I can't be more obvious about what the counter is, I'm not sure even CCP can help you. The real irony is that the NPCs you live among have it down better than you.

    its so easy, all you need are neuting bumping naglfars and you can easily kill these untacklable titans

    oh wait its 2016 not 2006

    its so easy, all you need are neuting bumping supercarriers and relying on the invincible rorqual to have forgotten his cap boosters

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Skia Aumer wrote:

    Fair enough. Then I'll make the same treatment for you:
    Everything you say here is either
    a) propaganda
    b) metagame
    c) scam
    Neither of these is worth reading. Move along people, this is just goons doing their goon thing!

    fire is hot, do not stick your hand in it

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Skia Aumer wrote:
    Andail Chanter wrote:
    Skia Aumer wrote:
    Because GSF cannot fly Rorqs?

    PL has an in-game surface area that presents few, if any, soft spots, unlike most other groups in game. It's to their advantage to have a wildly OP jump HIC.

    Sounds like a nice PL advert.
    Seriously though, I used to respect Goons. They could take a mechanics and abuse it as hell, showcasing how broken it was. And there were the days when Goons could take on any ~apex force~ with twice the numbers and build a monument of their enemy titan wrecks.

    just as always, it would literally be impossible for us to care less about the respect of npc pubbies

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ascenity wrote:
    Wait, so in the expansion you gave us a change that made the Risk >>>>>>>> Reward, and now you are removing even more of the reward??? I really hope that you have more plans for making it safer to use the Rorquals for those who do not have a Fat alliance behind them. Don't get me wrong, Excavator drones mined sooo much, but with so so much risk.

    i dont see what our weight problems have to do with this

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    endless lolling that "our careful analysis and weighing of the factors has determined this is the appropriate nerf to bring this in line to our master plan" is actually "oh right, carry the one...oops"

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Steve Ronuken wrote:
    One quick note for people

    Quote:
    Increasing the drop rates of the Elite Drone AI and Drone Coronary Unit rogue drone components


    Should drop the price for the excavator drones. So you shouldn't have to worry about the 10 billion isk rorqs. Because that won't be the eventual price.

    The elite drone AI's are currently selling at 12 million. Before the requirement was announced, they were pretty close to worthless. A higher drop rate should drop it.

    everyone noticed

    that nobody was discussing it should have clued you in on how important it was to the discussion

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    also, if you didn't feel like risking your bpo to failing to login in time you just used your tier three caldari outpost or, if you were a highsec untermenschen, a station

    nobody was ever putting anything above a cruiser bpo in their labs and leaving it be for a month

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    bpos have always been untouchable while building and researching unless you were a goddamned idiot gobbins

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lucas Quaan wrote:
    SidewinderFang wrote:
    Raivi showing favouritism to his old Alliance once again.

    I don't think you have seen our mining fleets. We just accept that this change was probably needed to reel in the crazy instead of crying about it on the forums.


    THERE ARE DOZENS OF US

    DOZENS

  • [December] Excavator Mining Drone yield rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I can't really debate if 32% nerf is or isn't appropriate, but I do question why "0.0 mining paying too much" is the sort of game-breaking thing that requires immediate patching while "invulnerable combat ships" is not.

  • [November] Rorqual Astrahus citadel docking fix in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Kenneth Feld wrote:
    Sarah Flynt wrote:
    Kenneth Feld wrote:
    Once drilling platforms are introduced, citadel will lose their reprocessing bonus and rigs will be removed and returned to the owner to place in a drilling platform.

    Source? Last I heard was that they were thinking about removal of mining rigs from citadels without destroying them, which is quite a difference.



    Nah, before people spent 250 bil on XL reprocessing rigs, they asked and it was made clear you would get a one time refund of rigs

    are they hoping to get refunded the isk once they realize refining asshouses exist or something

    who the **** bought those

  • Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting in EVE Information Center

    Also: what happens when I got a 20% armor hp bonus, got my armor shot down to 10% of my boosted armor, then lost the bonus? Do I have 10% of my unboosted armor, do I have 0% armor but still structure, or does my ship explode due to having negative armor?

  • Dev blog: Command Bursts and the New World of Fleet Boosting in EVE Information Center

    Reinhardt Kreiss wrote:
    So boosting is changing from an alt only affair to a fleet thing with redundancy built in. We can safely assume that fleets will incorporate several boosters per type not only because of the sphere radius but also because there's going to be losses.

    Isn't this system that relies on an AOE range check that affects targets that possibly already get that bonus from someone else who might/will have different skills going to cause massive lag issues when you get a whole bunch of ships and boosters close together?

    depends on the code, and my understanding is that the physics engine was specifically rewritten to allow for this sort of aoe effect without dying in a fire