EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2010-11-16 23:20
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-09-19 03:03
  • Number of Posts: 366
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 356

Silk daShocka

Security Status 0.0
  • Greasy Hair Club Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Please take notice CCP, dont go overboard with carebare love. in EVE Communication Center

    SoOza N'GasZ wrote:

    almost everyone in here says either im saying high is now too safe and crying that it needs more pvp or that im saying eve should be a reality simulator.... which they can only be stating if they either didnt read or didnt grasp the op. Big smile


    ". i hope they keep in mind that simulating a real place is far more important to the games total immersivenes" from OP. Seems like a desire for a reality simulator to me. Or perhaps you just want things to be "real" when they are convenient and advantageous to you.

    Quote:

    also you where telling me pretty much that there are places on earth where no criminality is possible and that crime only takes place where there is no police and if this is not the case the police always wins... and this also is not true in the slightest.

    you told me that the police has technology that makes it far superior to all criminals which it uses to nullify physical crime and that noone but them has access to... not true


    Provide us an example where someone blows up a strangers car in real life with a 1400mm artillery, while there are eyewitnesses around and where the criminal does not face massive consequences inlcuding but not always limited to several years in jail..

    Since you probably can't provide that example, provide us an example from real life where someone destroys a strangers car with any weapon causing it to be broken beyond repair, while there are eyewitnesses around and where the criminal does not face massive consequences inlcuding but not always limited to several years in jail.

  • Estimated Price - Please disable it for now. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Gryphon Infinite wrote:
    The estimated price, when you hover over an inventory item, is pretty pointless right now. Many discussions throughout the past have talked about it, and have verified that it isn't working properly.

    Please just disable it for now, it literally doesn't do much, and is an annoyance.

    OR

    With more effort, make this price just reflect like the cheapest buy order in the region / constellation / system / etc.

    Hope to hear everyone's feedback on this phenomena and my idea.


    I like the estimate, I don't want it removed.

    I"m not sure how it's an annoyance unless you have OCD I guess. Should be fairly simple to just disregard the number as being innacurate if you have knowledge that indicates it is often or always innacurate.

    I disagree entirely with making it the cheapest buy order regionally. A couple reasons being:

    1. Buy orders change frequently sometimes every minute (or in the case of Jita, multiples times in a minutes for some orders). These changes can be quite large in regions other than the forge, especially for low volume/rare items, and would make the estimated price even more inaccurate than it currently is in some cases.

    2. Some items have 90 day buy orders for 0.02 isk in regions that dont' have big trade hubs. The gap between buy/sell in this case is huge and would cause the item to be massively undervalued on the "estimated price"

  • Latest in a long line of small gang PVP nerfs... in EVE Communication Center

    Kahega Amielden wrote:
    Quote:
    That being said, tiericide has done some good to small gangs. T1 logistics for isntance. Cheap and effective.


    Been over this before. Logistics ships pretty much make blobs immune to small gang harassment. There used to be some cost and risk associated with this but now, nope. Any t1 shitfleet can have logistics.


    Why do you think larger fleets should be vulnerable to small gang harassment? Don't you think it would make more sense to compare small gang vs. small gang fights when balancing decisions are made?

  • Being "scanned down in 30 seconds" ... in EVE Communication Center

    Being scanned down in 30 seconds from teh time combat probes are launched, easily. Being scanned down in 30 seconds from the time someone appears in local, not too likely, but it won't take much longer than 30 secs in this case anyways.

    A scanner can locate you with D-scan and have a very good idea of where you are prior to launching any probes. He can then warp 14.3+ AU away from you, launch probes, then drop probes very close to the location he dscanned you at, enabling him to have a farily low scan radius on his probes, thus stronger signal strength on the hit. Doing this does depend on the system being big enough to warp 14.3+ AU away from you though, otherwise his scan ship and probes will appear on scan when he launches them, taking away 5-10 seconds or so from that 30 seconds, in this case he probably would have to get a hit on first scan to do it under 30, not all that likely, but in 40 seconds he'll probably have a hit.

  • Latest in a long line of small gang PVP nerfs... in EVE Communication Center

    So when will people that complain about small gang pvp getting nerfed start basing they're arguments on small gang vs. small gang instead of small gang vs. blob.

    That being said, tiericide has done some good to small gangs. T1 logistics for isntance. Cheap and effective.

  • Please take notice CCP, dont go overboard with carebare love. in EVE Communication Center

    SoOza N'GasZ wrote:
    . i hope they keep in mind that simulating a real place is far more important to the games total immersiveness than making it easier for players that dont want to accept the world they play in for what it is and have it be just to their liking.


    So, do you suggest that suicide gankers can't play their characters for 10 years, since if you blew up someones car as such in real life, you probably wouldn't be leaving jail for awhile. There's other comparisons to real life that can be made, to show that the non-carebears (or w/e you want to label people as) don't face realistic consequences in Eve.

    Eve doesn't simulate a real place, probably never will.

  • The Highsec Big Picture in EVE Communication Center

    Poetic Stanziel wrote:

    Mining barge buffs? No big deal. It's just a small change, you can still gank miners, it's just a little harder now, a little more expensive.


    Destroyer buff? t3 BCs? No big deal, mining barges were buffed, yet people still don't fit a tank, irrelevant change really.

    Quote:

    Removing insurance on highsec ganks? No big deal. It's just a small change. Gankers should only be profiting on their kills, not the loss of their ships.


    Pretty much offset by the introduction to t3 BC's. No longer will you sacrifice a battleship to gank someone, when you can simply throw a 80 mil BC to the fire.

    Quote:

    CONCORD warp disrupting you from across a system, the moment you open fire. No big deal. It's just a small change. Gankers should only be able to kill on a single grid.


    This could be viewed as a nerf to non-consensual pvp. Or maybe CCP just doesn't want concord to be irrelevant as teh faction navies.

    "The Crimewatch suspect flag. No big deal. It's just a small change, sure it's harder to make a living on highsec PvP due to suspect flagging when looting the booty. Nobody liked freighter ganking anyhow."

    Crimewatch changes are awesome to me. Sorry gankers, I understand its' painful to risk a suspect flag on your alt when your commiting a crime...


    "The killright system? No big deal."

    Kill-rights in theory could promote non-consensual pvp. Althought from what I've seen, they aren't used very often.

    Quote:

    The dueling system? No big deal. Sure it's consensual PvP, but it's a small change, and outside parties can still get involved.


    Dueling system is a replacement for can flip pvp of the past. I don't see why anyone would care this exists unless they are actually using it, and if they are using it it's probably a welcomed feature.

  • CCP Nerfs and the dreaded power creep in EVE Communication Center

    Using eve-kill top 20 to judge performance is pretty silly for several reasons.

    To name one, drakes are being used much less in null-sec fleet doctrines since HML nerf. You don't mention this, yet it has a huge impact on the topic you present. Despite being used less in those doctrines, drake still remains on the top 20, nearly tied with the hurricane.

    Pretty much every ship on the top 20 is being used in null fleet doctrines. This doesn't mean they are overpowered. This means that they fit the current tactical meta game, among other things.

    Then there is also the issue of what skills people have available to them. I don't know the statistics on this, but let's say more eve players have the skills to fit minmatar ships and fly them well. Thus, more people would fly minmatar ships, and generate more kills with them not because they are winning every fight, but because there's just more of them out there. That being said, one can assume the top 20 eve-kill list represents more so what ships are being flown the most, then what ships are the strongest. This argument is further reinforced by null-sec doctrines, where the FC is generally deciding what the pilots will be flying. With the CFC having a doctrine for maelstroms, having many doctrines that use huggins and scimitars, hurricane doctrines, TFI doctrines etc., many pilots have probably trained projectile and minmatar spaceship skills to a competent level.

    TL:DR eve-kill top 20 is a terrible reference for determining ship balance, without including other relevant statistics.

  • Threshold for ganking a Freighter should be higher? Discuss in EVE Communication Center

    Alavaria Fera wrote:
    baltec1 wrote:
    Core Researcher wrote:

    you cant have it both ways: either its teams and thats how the game works, or its not teams, in which case arguments stating freighter should have an escort are flawed at best.

    You do know that most people have figured out how to solo fly freighters in high sec. Its the complicated tactic of not putting ten billion in the hold.

    You could split 10 billion into a team of 10 and be safe.

    But wait, you could.. MULTIBOX FREIGHTERSSSSSSS


    Alternatively, couln't you fly 1 freighter with 10 billion and 9 blackbirds (or falcons if you have the sp for that) and be pretty safe?

  • Threshold for ganking a Freighter should be higher? Discuss in EVE Communication Center

    IF increasing the threshold for ganking freighters will lower the cost to use red frog, I think it's a great idea. Otherwise, I don't really care.

  • Hide your ISK, Team Security is out of control. (Allegedly) in EVE Communication Center

    Understandably, it's a little difficult for some people to understand how cache scraping can be considered against the rules.

    Now stop and think. How do you think a market bot operates. It has to "see" the lowest order on the market to be able to adjust the order price accordingly.

    Now think, what does a bot do that CCP can identify aside from potentially having a pattern to when orders are updated and potentially having a pattern for order change increments/thresholds on amount the order can be changed. You guessed it, cache scraping.

    I dunno maybe i'm wrong here, maybe theres' other easier more obvious ways to catch botters, but I think there is a good possibility that what I typed has some merit.

  • Gamers Health - PreSets and Combined key Commands: REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CLICKS in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Methos Horseman wrote:
    VegasMirage wrote:
    Our health should be a priority because if we can't play then CCP loses income and players lose in-game friends. I have had many in-game friends who simply quit due to the amount of clicking to implement simple processes.

    If there's anything CCP should try and do, it's make the game "healthier" to play. They should care about their loyal member base's health. Even the US government's Department of Health has released warnings about the long-term effects gaming has on the hands.

    Too many clicks and use of hands creates all kinds of issues, including wear and tear on keyboards and mice.

    CCP should therefore, attempt to reduce the amount of clicking in Eve. Allow users to have more options to combine commands or maintain settings from previous game play.

    In conclusion, CCP should expressly commit to addressing gamer hand strain as a corporate goal. These changes should be priority over any new features.

    Idea An example would be the decommissioning of Planetary Interaction colonies. Why do we have to decommission each structure separately when resources are obviously depleted. A "Decommission ALL" button should be added with exception to the Command Center.

    Idea Fleet formation, allow players to set "join same fleet as yesterday"... if fleet is same boss etc., then with 1 click on fleet button you join the same fleet

    Idea when deploying probes in space, why do I have to continually click the number of probes to release, why not have it stored so when you click launcher the set number are deployed. I'd rather have a menu that pops up and asks how many probes (worse case scenario).

    Idea Invention/Research/Copying: "having a message telling me the success or failure of a job is great, having to click it 10 times / hour isn't. Having to click through the screens to do the same thing with 10 of the same BPC for a one hour job sucks."

    Idea "Sell all button... Even if it'll take several minutes to process such request."

    Try and reserve this thread for making suggestions that specifically reduce the number of clicks in game. I'm sure many of you have gone through enough mice and keyboards to justify some changes.


    Thanks for reading my concerns and your constructive feedback is appreciated.



    I like your Ideas Vegas.
    One additional idea is the Add buy all button in the fittings window so that when people link a fitt to help people out.


    I was actually fitting a ship today, and I thought that it would be great if there was a buy all button. The UI could just prompt you with the total costs of the fit and ask yes/no, taking the prices from teh lowest prices in station, and buying the lowest prices items in station if you hit yes. It takes around 65 clicks on average just to buy all the fittings for a frigate, even more for drones, ammo, assembling, making it active, bringing upt he fitting screen/fitting browser.

  • Dear CCP Fozzie when can we expect to see OGB removed? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    NetheranE wrote:


    Putting a boosting loki on grid in a small nano gang is like handing your opponents a free loki kill.
    the small of gangs (read: fleets) that I used to lead are getting fisted in the face with this. we wont be able to engage **** without a ridiculously high lose:win ratio because blobs will remain blobby and the advantage that used to keep us in the fight is gone.
    No, i will not just add more idiots to my fleet. No, putting the links on a combat fit command ship is hardly an option, as most pilots are taxed as it is flying a nano/tanked setup with an OGB, can you imagine trying to manage 2 of these? It is not effectively possible and simply gives more power to the idiots and lazy kents that are unwilling to work to get where we already are.

    Solo condor arguments are just like the RR arguments used to be, there will always be douchecanoes that abuse mechanics. That does not mean we need to nerf something into the ground so that scrub blobs dont have to TRY to be better in PvP.

    This removes a strong element of time/ISK investment and work that EvE is built around. SP is a major advantage to an extent and this minimises the gap in a way few people recognise.


    Alright so dont' adapt to the inevitable changes that are coming. Putting an untanked logistics ship on field with your small nano gang would be like handing your opponents a free logi kill as well. Do you think CCP should make logi rep off grid? IS that balanced to you because you can win fights were you are outnumbered through this mechanic by using your leet pvp skills?

    The solo condor was an argument based on the post I replied to where he was referring to 2v1 scenarios. It wasn' t a absolute reason on it's own to justtify a nerf to OGB, and i'm sorry for you that your intelligence is too low to understand that.

  • Dear CCP Fozzie when can we expect to see OGB removed? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Zeus Maximo wrote:
    Gunship wrote:
    Cearain wrote:

    Maybe ccp should go in the opposite direction. Not only should I not have to be on grid with my booster ship, I should not even have to sign in with my booster alt, and still get the bonuses.


    Made me LOL Big smile

    The sooner we see the end of off-grid anything PvP the better.



    FALSE

    Boosters are just another tool available to pilots in eve.

    Yes they can help a pilot perform better in a fight but that is because they are THE MOST SPECIFIC SKILL INTENSIVE group to train for.

    I can train an alt 1 month so he will perma jam you in a fight
    I can train an alt 2 months so he will rep me against you
    I can train an alt 18 months so he can make my modules more effective in a fight.


    When fighting 2vs1 which would you rather have? To me your odds are greater with the pilot having a booster alt.......


    I'd like to see your math on 18 months train time. Seems to me its' 9 months to get every tech 2 link (6 months for tech 1) in the game on a t3 cruiser with no implants, nor attribute remap. 4 months to get one one specific tech 2 link variety (3 months for tech1.

    2v1, reps or a blackbird alt would be better yes. But links are still very good in 2v1, the issue is the bigger the fleet gets, the more value links have. I certainly would train 4 months to get a 33% range bonus to all prop jamming modules, a lower signature radius on any ship i fly and a speed bonus to any prop mod. Perhaps that is just me, but I don't think the training time is a justification to how links can affect an entire fleet with static bonuses that will last the entire fight.

    Also, an ECM alt can be eliminated from the fight (or e-war could be used to the same effect), negating teh benefit he brings to the fight entirely. A logi alt is the same case. A booster alt however, can only be eliminated from teh fight if he is not at a POS and you happen to have someone with max probing skills and a virtue set in your fleet.

    Sure it sucks for those that have boosting alts since there is some SP invested that you probably won't have a use for once the problem is fixed. Perhaps CCP will reimburse SP somehow (I dbout it), but in the worst case scenario you have an alt with cruiser 5 which can easily be made into a falcon alt, logi alt etc. within a very short period of time. Also, CCP hasn't said that they will be removing booster entirely, they said they want to fix OGB. YOu can always HTFU and put your booster on grid, although I would imagine people won't be doing this to make their solo condors pwn. I guess that's why they are called Fleet assistance modules, and not solo assistance modules.

  • Ancillary Armor Reppers, using nanite repair paste. in EVE Communication Center

    There's already a massive supply couple with a massive demand for paste.

    Price probably won't move much.

  • BRAVE NEWBIES really TEST alts - NOT NEWBS AT ALL in EVE Communication Center

    Gr0uch wrote:

    Can't we just have fun without your weird BS?


    You can, if you don't visit the eve forums, home of the weird BS.

  • Pirate/Faction Destroyers and Battlecruisers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    There were pirate rookie ships on singularity when I was last on, so maybe pirate destroyers and BC's will come at one point, along with new skills, new ships and maybe even new races.

    But this is all just speculation, the pirate ships on Singularity could just be gift ships for the 10 year anniversary, or even something else entirely not related to my ideas above.

  • Gamers Health - PreSets and Combined key Commands: REDUCE THE NUMBER OF CLICKS in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Invention, particularly t2 modules.

    Having a message telling me the success or failure of a job is great, having to click it 10 times / hour isn't. Having to click through the screens to do the same thing with 10 of the same BPC for a one hour job sucks.

    I hope CCP addresses the issues with PI and invention clicking in particular. I have done both and they are both really terrible and annoying.

    I have actually stopped doing PI altogether simply because of the clicking. I could elaborate on this, but I do believe that CCP knows teh issue. IF they don't they are very disconnected from the PI interface, and should try running an extractor and some factories for a week with 1 extractor alternating between 2 resources. Not fun at all.

    The rest of the clicking I do in eve is relatively tolerable, aside from some market activities which I think the clicking is nearly necessary due to the vast # of items in game etc.

  • Space Marines are bad, mkay? in EVE Communication Center

    Trdina Rasputin wrote:
    Who was first? Aliens 2 or workshop marines?




    REFERENCE :D

    They are BIG part of that movie.


    Aliens 1 was first if i'm not mistaken, in 1986. Space marines has been used in literature since the 30s however, so Games workshop is being rather silly on this matter really.

    BTW the person who GW made the trademark claim against, has had her e-book returned to the amazon.com collection.

  • BRAVE NEWBIES really TEST alts - NOT NEWBS AT ALL in EVE Communication Center

    http://www.eveskunk.com/standings.php?alliance=Test%20Alliance%20Please%20Ignore

    Seem TEST has set standings for brave newbies. Although they are neither blue nor red.

    That's not to say brave newbies are all test alts. Just food for thought really.