EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-03-17 04:51
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 20:05
  • Number of Posts: 2,210
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Sigras

Security Status 5.0
  • Conglomo Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    McBorsk wrote:
    Marcus Tedric wrote:
    McBorsk wrote:
    We must have access to a wide selection of moon goo so we can finally be self-sufficient. ..............


    If everyone was self-sufficient - there would be no reason at all for anything more than meaningless and frivolous pretend combat. War is driven by economics.

    With logistics in EVE so easy - if no one needed to go to Jita, HS would pretty much collapse.

    I'm okay with that!

    Luckily you dont speak for all of us because being ok with that is idiotic!

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    mkint wrote:
    Rena'Thras wrote:
    I'll ask the same for this that I've asked all along with all the Upwell Structures:

    WHEN WILL THERE BE A SMALL SIZE?

    .

    It was mentioned earlier by some people, but this means people that run small POSes now or smaller Corporations or industrial players now have to join a big Corp or Alliance in order to do this stuff. Right now, you can drop a small POS in Lowsec as an individual or small Corporation and work into the moon mining game, as well as dropping a small POS in Highsec if you want your own personal refining station.

    After this change, you're going from a 150M investment into a several billion ISK facility, something like a 10-100x increase in cost for people, yeah?

    I've always liked the idea of smaller groups being able to do things, and I love personal deployable structures, so I feel like there should be SMALL structures added to the Upwell lines. The fact that this is going to essentially phase out SMALL POSes, yet there is no SMALL version, I find very strange and not really defensible as a position unless the goal of EVE is to tell small groups or individual players that they aren't welcome in it.

    Surely that isn't the intention...?

    One can make the argument for Citadels not having a small size due to their nature. Engineering complexes the argument isn't as good, but it might still hold some water. But as we get more and more structures and get closer and closer to removing POSes from the game, CCP, you guys really need to look at throwing a bone to small corps and players that need smaller, cheaper, and more manageable facilities for their needs.

    CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE. If that bothers you, you are welcome to unsub. EVE has become a marketing driven game, and if you don't N+1, you don't contribute to their marketing and are thus disposable.

    Dude, this change is like, the opposite of that... This change finally gives smaller groups a way to subvert and fight back against the large juggernauts. Little by little, bit by bit, disrupted moon mining operation by disrupted moon mining operation.

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    Bill Lane wrote:
    RIP pure PVP alliances who rely on some passive income. This change literally makes a mining division a requirement for every alliance.

    On the plus side, refining. Cool.

    Oh and literally these will be priced in the range of citadels/ECs? So all of the POSes from 145 mill for the small tower moon miners to the billion isk large towers, you're telling me EVERY small tower will need to be replaced by something that costs more than a billion isk. Straight up screwing the small guys, and straight up screwing alliances with no mining groups aren't we CCP? For the record my alliance CAN afford it and DOES have a large mining division, so we're not too worried.

    What does concern me is how I, as the alliance CEO, will need to start taxing the hell out of everyone to make sure the alliance is making money. We didn't charge corp fees, paid good money for ore buyback, all that. This was by FAR the main income for us so I could pay SRP, give people good money for ores/salvage, etc. And we really aren't putting very much in the alliance wallet. We're not broke, but we're not rich by far.

    Honestly taxing the hell out of everybody sounds like a terrible idea. Guess corp fees are being forced on us now, along with awesome taxes. Come on now, this is really the best we could come up with?

    What the crap were you doing wrong that you were moon mining with small towers? Pretty much everyone mines with large towers for 3 reasons.

    1. Profit - if your moons arent super profitable, you want to use as few of them as possible, and do all of the extracting/reacting in one place.
    2. Defense - If your moons are super profitable, you want a large tower there to protect them.
    3. Practicality - POSs are cancer, and the fewer of them people have to deal with generally the happier they are.

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    John McCreedy wrote:
    There are only so many miners in this game and PvPers aren't going to start training for barges so they can have moon income. This means that for every miner that moves away from Ore mining, the amount available will reduce driving up the cost of the ore. This will have a knock on effect to ships which will become more expensive, potentially reducing the amount of PvP undertaken by players.

    Furthermore, I doubt that even the largest alliances in Eve have the personnel to mine belts 24/7 without a break as they are mined now by the automated process, therefore there will be less moon goo available. Less moon goo means more expensive goo, which in turn means more expensive ships again.

    You're basing this off of what? They haven't even hinted at the m^3 these new rocks are going to be, only that the ISK/m^3 will be better than ABCs

    Considering right now Arkonor brings in 312.5 ISK/m^3 that means dysprosium must come in at a minimum rate of 1 unit per 224 m^3

    This means that to equal a moon in the worst case scenario its just under 92 hulk hours per month. I would say a far more reasonable comparison would be a more mid range moon goo like Tech which works out to be just under 16 hulk hours a month to equal a moon, and that's if you just want to break even.

    considering the developers can fine tune this ad infinum, I'm not too worried.

  • [Citadels] Dreadnoughts in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Credacom wrote:
    Came expecting a rev buff....
    Sadly very disappointed.
    There is still much work to be done on this.

    Still no reason to Fly a revelation, bad CCP.

    I have two words for you... Scorch Ammo

    Scorch does like 6K DPS at 105 km

  • Kronos useless in PvE (At a high level) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Joe Risalo wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    I have no idea what you guys are talking about...

    I can fly (and have flown) all 4 marauders, and out to 50 km (the only relevant distance because of the MJD bonus) the Kronos performs the best. My strategy has always been to use the MJD to stay at < 50 km from my opponents and use the massive blaster falloff to take them out before they take me out.

    The only problem I can see is that she lacks the damage selection of the Golem and the Vargur, but she does so much more damage it seems irrelevant.


    I disagree..
    In PVE, I would say the Golem is the best.

    Using Cruise missiles, you get 1k dps at max targeting range (118km), with good application.

    [Golem, Cruise]
    Ballistic Control System II
    Ballistic Control System II
    Ballistic Control System II
    Ballistic Control System II

    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Missile Guidance Computer II, Missile Precision Script
    Large Micro Jump Drive
    Pith X-Type X-Large Shield Booster
    Heavy Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 800
    Dread Guristas Adaptive Invulnerability Field

    Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
    Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
    Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
    Cruise Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Cruise Missile
    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]
    Small Tractor Beam II
    Bastion Module I

    Large Warhead Calefaction Catalyst II
    Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II

    Hobgoblin II x5
    Salvage Drone I x5
    Warden II x1

    Implants
    CM-605
    GP-805
    TN-905
    RL-1005


    1037 DPS with implants
    Boosts for 22% shield HP in one cycle while in bastion
    Cap booster for when I forget to turn off my damn shield booster (all the time)
    Triangulate gate on MJD out, then MJD back in to gate... 2 min 30 sec to reach gate regardless of distance.
    118km targeting range
    Damage selection based on mission


    Too easy...

    Admittedly, I havent re-evaluated my ideas of marauders since the advent of the missile tracking computers

  • Kronos useless in PvE (At a high level) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Khan Wrenth wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    I have no idea what you guys are talking about...

    I can fly (and have flown) all 4 marauders, and out to 50 km (the only relevant distance because of the MJD bonus) the Kronos performs the best. My strategy has always been to use the MJD to stay at < 50 km from my opponents and use the massive blaster falloff to take them out before they take me out.

    The only problem I can see is that she lacks the damage selection of the Golem and the Vargur, but she does so much more damage it seems irrelevant.


    I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm interested in seeing what you do to make blaster Kronos worthwhile. Let me explain....

    I have less experience with Marauders than you probably do, but I fly the three turret ones (I hate missiles), choosing the best one for whatever situation I'm in. But when I fly Kronos, I fly rail and I haven't found a worthwhile combination of fit and tactics to make blasters come out over rails.

    I'm aware of the massive damage potential of blasters. But for easy comparison, I'm using PYFA to ironically "EFT-warrior" my way through this. Jokes aside, and all things being equal, the blaster Kronos only out-damages the Paladin under 23 kilometers. With Tech II ammo for both, that only jumps to 27km under the most ideal circumstances. Using the same basic tactic with the MJD of keeping red crosses at certain distances, the Paladin has a HUGE engagement envelope compared to the other turret vessels.

    To use Blasters, you'd need significantly better sub-light speed to get targets in your ideal engagement envelope, so MWD is almost a must (afterburner if not MWD, but preferably MWD). If you're still running MJD, that's two of your four mids right off the bat. And the ranges I quoted were assuming two range-scripted tracking computers. You can do that (and I did for a little while, actually trying to make blasters work better for me), but then you have no cap booster. And if stuff hits the fan (and Guristas can be powerful little buggers and stuff can definitely hit the fan with them), then you'll need to run heavy reps and you can cap out fast. You can do it without a cap booster, but it's a gamble I don't think I'd want to take in case I have to bastion (I run rail Kronos and never needed cap booster or bastion, but it's there just in case). Drop the MWD for cap booster? Again, you could, but if something is just outside your preferred engagement range, you would dramatically overshoot if you MJD (if something is way outside your engagement range, obviously the MJD would get you much closer).

    It just seems like a lot more trouble than it's worth, and the time you'd be positioning with blasters would be better spent nailing enemies from afar with rails and being on your merry way. So what am I not seeing or have not considered that makes blasters awesome?

    One single word: Damage

    Blasters do so much more damage than rails that even at 40 km blasters with null still out damage rails with javelin. Generally what I do when i get into a complex is see if the enemies are > 50 km away, If so, I MJD over to them. While waiting for my MJD i calculate how far from the enemy i'll end up, and I load the correct type of ammo (void if < 21 km null otherwise).

    Yes, at ranges > 27 km the pulse pally is better, but anything less than that and the kronos out damages it, and most of my engagements happen at < 27 km

  • Kronos useless in PvE (At a high level) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I have no idea what you guys are talking about...

    I can fly (and have flown) all 4 marauders, and out to 50 km (the only relevant distance because of the MJD bonus) the Kronos performs the best. My strategy has always been to use the MJD to stay at < 50 km from my opponents and use the massive blaster falloff to take them out before they take me out.

    The only problem I can see is that she lacks the damage selection of the Golem and the Vargur, but she does so much more damage it seems irrelevant.

  • PETITION: No SP gain from injectors for 80mil+ characters in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Dr Cedric wrote:
    It doesn't really affect me or my 140M SP, and if it adds players and content, then all the better.

    I'm sorry, but this is completely wrong...

    Right now the 100M+ SP players are a rare commodity; the ability to say to a random person in my fleet "go get your HIC" instead of having to say "who can fly a HIC?" is a big deal.

    Right now those players are a rare commodity because the only way to get up to that amount of SP is to train for it, but after the patch that's all going to change. What once was rare will now be common place, and I guarantee that this change will be reflected in the prices at the character bazaar.

    TL;DR
    yes, it does effect you; it makes your character less rare and therefore less valuable.

  • Remove Learning implants in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Teckos Pech wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    The issue I have here is that learning implants do create opportunity cost within the game beyond just ISK.

    There is a reason I dont fly with slave sets all the time even though I can afford it... Without these trade-offs there are far fewer reasons not to always sit in at least low-grade pirate implant sets.

    Dude, the whole game is full of opportunity costs. You cannot remove opportunity costs entirely. In fact, I'd argue it is those opportunity costs that make the game. You asses these costs then take an action. What the OP here is arguing over though is a trivial opportunity cost. It is like worrying what effect the change in price of pencils in Oregon will have on the price of toilet paper in Finland. There may very well be an effect, but WTF cares?

    Im sorry I just feel that a 20% boost to armor HP is a big effect...

    Without the opportunity cost of training slower, that's what you're gonna get because low grade slaves are cheap easy to come by and (after this change) come with no drawbacks!

    Then these same poor people are just going to start whining about how slave sets or snake sets are "mandatory and should be removed from the game because it's a choice in name only" when in reality it was their whining that took the choice out of the equation in the first place!

  • Remove Learning implants in EVE Technology and Research Center

    The issue I have here is that learning implants do create opportunity cost within the game beyond just ISK.

    There is a reason I dont fly with slave sets all the time even though I can afford it... Without these trade-offs there are far fewer reasons not to always sit in at least low-grade pirate implant sets.

  • large ships vs smaller ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    IMHO if we had bombs that could hit cruisers and made T3 cruisers a bit more balanced we'd solve the battleship problem.

    This gives me an idea:

    fast bombs--they travel twice as fast and detonate in half the time. They deal significantly less damage but have a smaller explosion radius. They'll still crush frigs just like the big bombs though frigs might get a warp off in time. Cruisers will be vulnerable cause they likely can't warp off in time.

    A fantastic idea, I love it... In fact, it sounds familiar...

  • large ships vs smaller ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Goatman NotMyFault wrote:
    Sigras wrote:
    Here's the problem...

    When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best"

    In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates.

    I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you.

    Refere to sizeable Battles the last year where that is the issue.... where battleship was the major force.... I havent found a big Battle in null which include a majority of battleships.

    In a set situsation, following EVE rules of Battle, a little frigate can take Down a battleship, lets say Hyperion, 1,5km long... (With a moron fit and moron player)... its like wrecking a car With a peagun...

    You're too young to remember, but the game used to be as you suggest where no frigate had a chance against any larger ship. There were 90% webs on every ship and nos that would suck you to 0% cap and keep you there.

    The year was 2007, and you know what happened? Nobody flew frigates because they had no use!

    Every combat manual for the game began with "Train out of the small ships as quickly as possible because they're useless" and HACs were considered "fast tackle"

    Honestly the battleship does have a role, it's just overshadowed right now with T2 and T3 cruisers which do everything a battleship can do, but are faster and immune to bombs. IMHO if we had bombs that could hit cruisers and made T3 cruisers a bit more balanced we'd solve the battleship problem.

  • large ships vs smaller ships in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Here's the problem...

    When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best"

    In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates.

    I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you.

  • Proposal in EVE Technology and Research Center

    What role do you envision frigates having with this change?

    need I remind you that two different types of frigates (Assault Frigates and Interceptors) are solely designed around tackling?

    If frigates arent supposed to tackle well then what ARE they supposed to do well? And if the answer is nothing, then why should they even exist?

    In this game bigger doesnt equal better, and that's the way it should be.

  • Battleship Module *** Potential to bring Battleships back into the fra in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Battleships will never be popular in large fleets as long as they are the only ship class adversely affected by bombs.

    Smaller ships simply move out of the way, and larger ships shrug off the damage as if nothing happened. This has contributed to the rise of the cruiser age as cruisers can simply orbit anchor mindlessly, but battleships cant.

    What we need are anti-cruiser bombs which have a smaller explosion radius and deploy faster, but do less damage and have less HP.

    This will level the playing field as no matter what ship class you're in, just sitting and orbiting anchor will be lethal.

  • Remote Micro Jump Drive balance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Capitol One wrote:
    mrjknyazev wrote:
    Allow your logi pilots to fly by themselves, instead of orbiting an anchor.

    That is very hard when the rep range is about 12km.

    Last I checked, logistics cruisers had > 30 km range with additional falloff. Even logistics frigates have major falloff beyond 12km.

    We need more AOE effects to counter blobs, not less.

  • Advanced Spaceship Command needs a overhaul in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Personally I would like CCP to do the opposite of removing the skill and create more ships that rely on Advanced Spaceship command.

    Maybe a line of combat ships that are constructed out of cap ship parts like the orca is. Nothing with a jump drive, but something using capital guns maybe?

  • ISK sink ideas in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Serendipity Lost wrote:
    (read this slowly) BLOW SSSSHHHHHIIIIITTTTTT UP.

    Im going to explain this as simply as I can on the off chance that you are able to understand it...

    when you "BLOW SSSSHHHHHIIIIITTTTTT UP" more ISK enters the game than leaves it. This is part of the problem not part of the solution.

    Pretend for simplicity sake that you and I are the only people in Eve (God help me), and you have a destroyer for sale that I want. You have 0 ISK + the destroyer and I have 2,000,000 ISK meaning a total of 2,000,000 ISK in all of New Eden.

    You agree to sell me the ship for 1,960,000 ISK (the other 40,000 ISK is lost to taxes)

    Now you have 1,960,000 ISK and I have a destroyer.

    Then you being a nasty pirate blow up my shiny new destroyer.

    Now you have 1,960,000 ISK and I have nothing... Until...

    I get a notification that my insurance has kicked in, and I am reimbursed 750,000 ISK

    Now you have 1,960,000 ISK and I have 750,000 ISK... There is now MORE ISK in New Eden than when we started.

    The reason economies around the world are doing poorly is not because of economists... It's because of idiots like you who think they understand how things work and really dont...

  • Purchasing Items From the Market Should Always Send ISK to Seller in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Moac Tor wrote:
    The market broker always sells to the person with the lowest order. If person a wants to pay an extra 10mil above the market price for their item they are free to do so but the broker will still sell to the lowest order. I've always wondered if the scammers who make ridiculously high orders realise this as it seems to be pointless trying to scam people when it is often quite random who will get that ISK if the scam works (particularly in Jita where most of these scams occur).

    That being said I don't see any reason to change this mechanic. If anything the extra ISK should go to the broker as an ISK sink or it should return back to the player who made the purchase order.

    Came here to say this...

    In Eve everyone uses brokers (even though it's transparent) because everyone pays the broker fee. It makes no sense for the broker not to buy the cheapest item on the market when they're literally all identical. IMHO it should be taken out of the game as an ISK sink and that broker should retire at the expense of his idiot client.

    I see no reason to facilitate scams, just as I see no reason to eliminate them... Guess you're just going to have to do more "work"