EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-04-12 00:55
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-04-21 20:59
  • Number of Posts: 82
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Sullen Decimus

Security Status 4.2
  • Polaris Rising Member since
  • The Bastion Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Pterry Dactyl Kasterborous wrote:
    28 pages. have you figured out this is a dumb way of fixing a non problem?

    "PVE is too easy so we are going to nerf carriers/supers in a way that ALSO completely nerfs PVP capability"

    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    when are you changing high sec incursions? or is that isk faucet ok?


    This.... so ******* much

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Yes lets nerf carriers/supers more because it makes too much sense to be making money off your 3 bil investment. Particularly since a massive portion of the income shown is from people in AFKtars and AFKvexors which will literally be unaffected by this change. So lets make it more awful for people who actively rat while making it more profitable for people who do it completely passively.

    OH yeah and "leet" lowsec pvp'ers win again. We're almost back to the days when 2 scrubs in ships worth 500 mil total can tackle and kill a fully fit 3 bil carrier.

  • Nullification and Interdiction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    baltec1 wrote:


    T3 would have the ability to adapt without a station or capital/nester and the ability to swap out rigs without destroying them. Cost means nothing to a lot of us but I would expect T3C build costs to drop and the SP loss tossed in the bin as it doesn't work.


    T3C's are one of the best examples of how to add balance to a ship other than just pure isk. Using cost as the only balance has never worked. Yet it still happens. The best recent example of this the T3D's do they cost more than an Assualt frig? sure. is the worst T3D still better than the best AF? yup... cost is no balance at all.

  • [Mini-blog] The Next Steps in Structure Transition in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Nasar Vyron wrote:
    I may have read past this, but what about clones (and implants) in those stations?
    I assume they'll just be moved to the new structure? So I'd assume they will also have an active clone bay module.
    Very expensive clones that were locked down in a station, safe until we could safely retrieve them, now would have the chance to be destroyed if the owning corp decides to convert and unanchor.


    RIP your old clones lol. Better get those little bastards out while ya still can. You have 8 months to think about it.

  • Can we get rid of CSM after the recent PLEX insider trading fiasco? in EVE Communication Center

    This entire thread is ******* hilarious. You're literally spewing **** while shooting yourself in the foot for your own arguments you're presenting. Before I get to that though if we leaked anything why the hell wouldn't we have done it months ago? We were never informed when this dev blog was even going up but knew about it months in advance. There is no way we would have known about it going up the days leading up. Now how you're literally wrong and proved it yourself.

    This image has been linked in the forum already http://i.imgur.com/69fHmVs.png

    You point to the 20% increase as us buying up the market. Here's the thing. see those blue bars across the bottom? Those are the daily volume traded. Notice how it literally didn't change at all during the increase. It actually had a small decrease! So you're argument is shot. There is no backing of it at all. In fact, it supports we didn't leak anything because the market volume didn't change at all. PLEX is known to have waterfall effects in it's price so if anything it's much more likely plex sellers started to see the price going up (from natural market fluctuation) and decided to hold their plex while it was rising as any knowledgeable market person would do. This happens all the time in this market.

    Also IF WE DID leak anything, plex is one of the single easiest items to track. Our accounts/alts are the most scrutinized in the game. Even if we told friends about it to get a benefit that **** is easy to track. Your argument is dead. Leave it in the grave and lay off the conspiracy koolaide awhile.

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    Locke Beulve wrote:


    Quote:
    The existing reactions will be converted to new blueprints that enable the reaction process in the new system, and new reactions will include small amounts of ice products in each run to compensate for the lower number of starbase towers needed for advanced industry.


    Whoaaaaaa there. Already ice products are required to be used to fuel these structures, which makes use of ice mats. There's no need to go overboard and make the fuel block prices skyrocket even more then they already are from shortages of Strontium. There is huge potential for these new structures, but lets not reinvent the wheel here.


    This will be absolutely necessary. You can now essentially do ALL of your reactions in a single structure. Without this a huge portion of the isotope demand in the game would die as one of the single largest consumers of isotopes is reaction farms.

  • Nullification and Interdiction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Now that we have decaying bubbles I want to reopen this forum. here are some general view points.

    - having nullified travel isn't a bad thing. We recommended having shuttles with nullification as they would still allow easy travel, without bringing combat.
    - nullified interceptors are bad gameplay. They don't encourage any sort of engagement as they can run and are basically uncatchable.
    -nullified T3C's seem broken in situations but not at the level of interceptors.

    Want more feedback

  • Nullification and Interdiction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Petit Julot wrote:
    CSM shouldn't weignt on the metagame, period.

    Please do whatever very important other thing you may have to do or just have a drink


    We're asking this to see if there is support to remove it from ships.

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

    Gogela wrote:
    Obil Que wrote:
    Sullen Decimus wrote:
    SIEGE RED wrote:
    Interesting, every bit of market data hints more than strongly at a CSM leak prior to this devblog. It was already weird, yet now it's clear.


    What??


    Tinfoil 1: PLEX rising prior to announcement means CSM leaked the data and influenced prices
    Tinfoil 2: PLEX falls prior to announcement means CSM leaked the data and influenced prices

    Choose

    Tinfoil 1

    You don't think that's more than coincidence?

    OK than... Roll


    I just want to know why you think that we are told "hey guys we're going to inject a shitload of plex into the game when aurum converts" would ever equate to me wanting to go buy enough plex to jump the market up by 15%.

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

    ApexDynamo wrote:
    This is probally the dumbest thing ive read all day Shocked

    We are going to change 1 plex into 500 plex but will still cost 500 plex for a 1 month sub, So whats the point in changeing it then?

    item inventory vault 2,700 plex is 5.6B isk you can already get that with 5 plex without clicking quick sell so agen What's the point in changeing it.


    I do not see any logical factor behind changeing something to a different number when it will still cost the 500 for a 1 month like the 1 month = 1 plex already is :/


    Because everything can be purchased with PLEX instead of having to deal with aurum.............

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

    Allsales Final wrote:
    Sullen Decimus wrote:
    SIEGE RED wrote:
    Interesting, every bit of market data hints more than strongly at a CSM leak prior to this devblog. It was already weird, yet now it's clear.


    What??

    What do you mean "what"?

    It is all quite odd. Announce a game changing policy on an arbitrary Thursday afternoon and hope the impact is minimized?

    It was leaked.


    What information are you gathering that it was leaked. Point me to the evidence you are referencing.

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

    SIEGE RED wrote:
    Interesting, every bit of market data hints more than strongly at a CSM leak prior to this devblog. It was already weird, yet now it's clear.


    What??

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

    Manic Velocity wrote:
    I like the idea of unifying PLEX and Aurum, and the concept of making PLEX more granular in how it is bought and sold. These two things really simplify the mental gymnastics of how PLEX can be used. Good stuff there.

    But I absolutely DO NOT like the concept of the PLEX Vault. This completely eliminates the risk/reward aspect of moving PLEX throughout the cluster, which will cause all PLEX prices to be completely stable across New Eden.

    The PLEX Vault treats PLEX as a unique item which is always safe unless the player is exceptionally stupid. And that's not how EVE works. Destruction is vital to the sandbox, and the PLEX Vault reduces the chance of PLEX being destroyed to nearly zero.

    The PLEX Vault feels like a hand-holding feature created specifically for newbros and Alphas who couldn't be bothered to do the bare minimum of research before purchasing PLEX. I get that CCP wants to invite and retain new players, but don't do it by babying them. It's insulting to their intelligence, and it will only serve to give them the wrong impression. EVE is not a place where you or your assets should feel 100% safe, EVE is not 100% fair, and that's exactly what makes the game worth playing.


    I would imagine it's more to do with having a cross character bay which all characters on an account can access (something btw players have been asking for years to have). If it removes the plex tanking of ships, I'm ok with it. It's a hilarious aspect of the game which we all like to point at laugh at, but really doesn't make or break anything in the game. Is plex safer now? sure. Does it impact anyone's gameplay though? not really.

  • ☼ Sullen Decimus for CSM XII ☼ in Council of Stellar Management

    DeMichael Crimson wrote:
    Hello,

    My question - what is your viewpoint regarding Faction standings and as a CSM member, what changes will you propose to CCP pertaining to game mechanics for Faction standings ?

    Good luck to you in the upcoming CSM election.


    DMC


    What are you referring to? Faction warfare standings? Faction standings over all with regards to mission running?

  • ☼ Sullen Decimus for CSM XII ☼ in Council of Stellar Management

    Orca Platypus wrote:
    The reason this trash should never be anywhere near CFCSM of CCPL.

    Trash like him on CSM is the reason #1 to boycott election entirely.
    Hey CCPL, can we get a vote against the CSM entirely?


    Drone Regions resident?

  • Please, fix industry tax in citadels in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Tipa Riot wrote:
    Fully agree to that points, the player tax should be independent of the SCI NPC tax. The current system encourages people to setup complexes in high index systems to farm newbies, instead of providing the service in more valuable locations and get a fair fee. Also the cost reduction rigs applied before tax calculation is ridiculous.


    Get out of my head..... i don't like it when people beat me to posting what i've been shouting internally for months :)

  • [March] Mobile Warp Disruptor changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This seems like a great compromise.

  • Please, fix industry tax in citadels in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Nagual wrote:
    That screenshot was taken on Feb 14? That should be a bug that was fixed today (it lasted 24 hours apparently).

    So, please ignore that ; )

    What about other activities on the ECs? Invention, MR, TR, etc...? Are there perceived issues on those too?





    As i've stated on other chat...Big smile... invention/ME/TE research is currently terrible because the "cost reduction" rigs actually kill the income for the structure owner. This is also multiplied by the inherent cost reduction in EC's as all these reductions occur before the owner tax is actually pulled. As a result the owner is essentially screwing them self by offering better services.

  • Please, fix industry tax in citadels in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Andrew Xadi wrote:


    yup, and that's why player tax should be applied to item value, not system cost index, or system cost index should not be applied to player owned structures. Removing npc tax from citadels would remove a huge isk sink so that's probably not going to happen, but i don't see any reason not to apply player tax to item base value together with npc tax


    I don't have a problem having the NPC tax as you stated is a major isk sink which the game right now can't afford to remove considering we have been at a massive faucet imbalance for so long. That being said I agreed with what you were saying on the taxes being applied to the items base value and not the SCI. The current system basically makes structure owners WANT to screw their users as much as possible by driving SCI up in the systems where their structures are.

    I have been pushing that this is an issue but we need to see more people like you stating this is an issue so I can point to you when i say "people know about this" Big smile

  • Jin'taan for CSM XII in Council of Stellar Management

    I would like the fully endorse Jin in his reelection for the CSM. He has been a great asset in not just nullsec items but also the game as a whole. As many current CSM have stated it is better to endorse candidates who will better the game, and are more than just an alliance ticker. Jintaan is one of those people I can fully support as helping to make the game better for everyone.

Forum Signature

CSM XI Member

Twitter: Sullen_Decimus

Tweetfleet: @sullen_decimus