EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2009-09-12 16:48
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-10-02 16:43
  • Number of Posts: 644
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

TheMercenaryKing

Security Status 2.1
  • Ultimatum. Member since
  • Almost Awesome. Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Rorqual Mininig Yield with Mining Drones II in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Couple of things:

    1. Drone travel time.

    Mining drones are not sentry drones. They Move to the asteroid, Mine, return to your ship. Rinse and repeat over and over. Closer you are to the asteroid and faster the drone speed, the more you mine.

    2. There seems to be a problem with PYFA Calculations.

    Currently testing, but it seems there is a calculation error somewhere in pyfa. Inside Eve, a character without mining skills gets a 29 second mining timer with Excavator ice mining drones, but in pyfa an all level 0 character gets 26.3

  • This Week in EVE #102 - Week 49/2015 in EVE Information Center

    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=459024

    Please see this post too.

  • Farewell to my friend / Heartfelt thank you to the Eve Community in EVE Communication Center

    As many of you have heard on Facebook, Twitter, and the various sharings from Eve players, there was the unfortunate passing of Robert Adams A.K.A. Photon Torpedo.

    Robert was one of the 14 victims in San Bernardino where he was at a party with his co-workers when one of his co-works and that co-worker's wife opened fire killing Rob, 13 other, and injuring at least another 20. We were unaware of his status for 24 hours hoping that he was safe and would be found hiding somewhere in the building, but we were met with our nightmare.

    Robert was a member of Starfleet Enterprises [SFEP] and Ultimatum. [F1N4L] since 2010 when I had first met him.

    Yesterday a family friend of his opened a GoFundMe page for his wife Summer and 20 month old daughter Savannah (which I am not sharing at this time as I am not asking people to donate). This GoFundMe page was then shared around the members of the Eve Community with some site like EveSkunk redirecting their home page to it. Since the pages creation yesterday, 688 people have donated a total of 27,500 USD to it. Unfortunately I cannot determine how many of you from the Eve community are helping to support my friend's wife and daughter but I know that the value achieved would nowhere near match what it is now without any of you.

    Seeing all of the people help my friend's family is actually making me start to cry a bit. Normally I steel my emotions and rarely reveal what I am feeling but being directly impacted at the loss of a friend and seeing so many people who didn't even know him stepping out to help only because of a shared hobby is really...well I can't even come up with the words.

    Thank you, everyone who has given your support.

    Edit: I would like to remind everyone of the rules in the forum.

    "CCP Falcon" wrote:
    7. It shouldn't be necessary to do so, but it appears that some players feel the need to inflict their viewpoints on race, religion, politics, and other hot topic opinions on other players. These discussions will not be tolerated anywhere on the EVE forums. Players that cannot follow this guideline can lose their posting privileges immediately. This is the sole warning that will be issued regarding this.


    Even though there is more information coming through about what happened, please do not use this as a target for any hate. I know Photon/Rob would not want any of it.

  • Changes to gridsize in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Assuming the size of grids is going to be like 1 million KM, it would be amazing if in this release or next to add an overview filter option or tab to filter out select items over X distance. This means if we see ships and stuff on the overview that is 1000km away, well out of targeting range, we can hid them from our overview.

    This is mainly for when/if you filter by Name, type, and so on. It will not display people who are beyond combat support (not counting off grid boosters). You will still see them in space and their tags, just hiding them from overview.

  • Dev blog: Reworking Capital Ships: And thus it begins! in EVE Information Center

    I would absolutely love it if you redesigned dreads to have 6-8 guns. And as for the 1-2k damage in siege (if i read correctly) on those subcap targeting turrets, it is not worth it.. 3-4k would be reasonable due to cost/damage scaling as many battleships can reach 1.5k dps and the highest is around 2.4k.

  • Dev blog: Tranquility Tech III in EVE Information Center

    l0rd carlos wrote:
    Quote:
    What you see here are 2x IBM SAN volume controllers which govern and control 2x IBM V5000 controllers which store all the data with 3x expansion shelves that house 9x800 GB SSD's with a grand total of 83x 1.2TB 10K SAS disks.


    I don't get this. The sentence make it sound like the SSDs have SAS disks build in :D That can't be right.


    Likely it is a tiered system with 9 SSDs and 83 10k drives.

  • Hyperdunking removal in EVE Technology and Research Center

    afkalt wrote:
    Masao Kurata wrote:
    It's a tactic that anyone is free to employ... except for gankers. It's also a sudden reversal of their official opinion from January.



    Because never have they changed their minds before.


    Hobo-bubbling
    skynet
    entosis ceptors
    garage door cynos
    titan bowling (both types)
    e-warp bumping to catch supers on login.


    They were all also fine, until they were not.

    I could go on, but you get the point.


    CCP Falcon wrote:
    Due to the fact no rules are being broken and any ship that is involved in a criminal act is being destroyed by CONCORD as intended, that this tactic is simply an unintended but legitimate use of new game mechanics, and is not in breach of the rules.


    Again, CCP stated that it was a loophole in the rules and mechanics that they did not anticipate.

  • Hyperdunking removal in EVE Technology and Research Center

    What you refer to as a "Tactic" is a "Loophole" to the Devs. They merely fixed the loophole.

  • [Vanguard] 350k added skillpoints for new characters! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Not a bad change I guess. I mean, it does kind of suck for some of us vets who had to learn all of this stuff and plan accordingly - AFTER LEARNING SKILLS!

    I mean, 300k exp is.....i think 2015 sp/hour is a good average (forgetting actual numbers) 350,000/2000 is like 175 hours, a week of training? Most of my skills are like week long or above to train so i am not missing anything really.

    Some people say just give unallocated SP. New players don't know **** and that SP boost for an alt account is total BS.

    I think taking it back even farther and make the bloodlines matter again would be cool too. Give bloodlines different starting skills - Indy focused, combat focused, trading focused.

  • Dev blog: Citadels, sieges and you v2 in EVE Information Center

    So after reading a bit, it seems people are concerned of the self defensive options available on the citadels. I think it is important to be able to fit guns or some form of EWAR on it. The thought of a false sense of security is kind of true and should somehow change.

    The problem with the false sense of security is that the guns are effective and maybe too effectuve against a single target but ineffective against a large force. The common idea is to make guns more powerful against targets and kill them faster but that would make them overpowered. My though is to have turrets with an AoE or semi-AoE type turrets/mods.

    So the immediate thought is that AOE will hit everything within the blast radius, but there is an obvious problem with that - its kind of OP. If it is possible, then it should be more like a Flak cannon or shotgun blast; Things in the area of the target have a chance of being hit, but will not always be hit like a smartbomb or bomb. Like every gun, the turret will have a sig limit on it so smaller ships take less damage, or maybe can dodge it, but larger ships can be hit more easily but take damage as if it was a smaller ship shooting it. This would scale from S to XL turrets where Small turrets would be good AA vs frigs and fighter/fighterbombers but limited damage vs Battlecruisers and XL would be effective against capital ship clusters but ineffective vs smaller but can *rarely* still hit smaller targets.

    One issue people have with these would be if like current POS mechanics, you would need to shoot them. I think rather than remove the entosis links from the new Citadels would be to use the entosis links to disable or take control of the hostile turrets. Instead of splitting damage you can focus your damage on the target and incap turrets at the same time.


    • Make turrets useful vs fleets
    • Make turrets not overpowered against single targets
    • Disable turrets while being able to target the primary objective or targets of importance


    These, combined with the other proposed idea I had of a minimum DPS before the repair timer is paused/reset would work in conjunction.

    One more thing I want to add is that I really really want the citadels to EVOLVE. That means, observing how players use them and make small changes to them like maybe in the future, their evolution would lead them to be able to jump or move around. Begin with inter-planetary movement, have a citadel move to a strategic point in the system like a gate when you think an enemy fleet is coming (with a long spool up timer and a slow ass warp), then after half a year or year evolve the navigation component of the structure to jump. DO NOT ADD NEW FEATURES TO REPLACE THEM, JUST EVOLVE THEM.

  • Dev blog: Citadels, sieges and you v2 in EVE Information Center

    Alexander Tekitsu wrote:
    Aryth wrote:
    Alexander Tekitsu wrote:
    Ben Ishikela wrote:
    Any way, If the citadel is beyond its vulnerable timer but the repair timer is still on, then ...
    .. someone could sacrifice a stealthbomber every 30minutes to keep the timer running indefinitely.

    "As mentioned above, the repair damage stops whenever damage is applied. It will resume counting down 10-30 seconds after the structure stopped receiving incoming damage. When the repair timer hits 0, the structure fully repairs its shields, armor and hull"

    From the blog, you would have to sacrifice one every 10-30 seconds for indefinite. /me is learning to read \o/

    "Be aware that we are actively seeking to prevent types of hit and run tactics that would allow the attacker to apply damage without committing to the battlefield (we are looking at you, Stealth Bombers). If you want to attack someone’s assets, be ready to commit your fleet to it."

    Also from the blog, gotta say, made me smile a bit with the last line.


    The issue is the fleet is irrelevant. It took maybe one hour for us to figure out a meta that renders defending pretty much irrelevant. Oh sure, fleets will die but not fleets that cost anywhere near what the XL does.

    That is EVE. I have no doubt that a fleet of rookie ships would also be able to do it with enough numbers ( provided they don't group up and get smoked by 1 AoE Torp ). But at least it isn't 1 cepter with a laser which was more the reason for my comment.


    What if there was not only a damage cap before the damage is reduced, but also a DPS minimum, like set an XL tower to 1500 DPS before repair is paused with that 10-30 second timer where if it is below 1500 dps it begins repairing again?

    This will require a constant minimum number of people to shoot it. It would be like this:
    0-1,500 DPS for a minimum of 10-30 seconds, Repairing
    1,500-60,000 DPS, Repairing paused
    60,001+ DPS, Repair paused, damage reduced.

    This would prevent troll-ceptors or people attempting to not engage/commit.

  • [Idea] Unique ship skins for level 5 mastery certificates. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Supported. makes it kind of unique to get them. Right now it is like "ugh, why bother training all these skills to V when the combined bonus is 1%". 448 dps with all level 4, 451 with all 5.

  • [Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    HiddenPorpoise wrote:
    Why do they all have the exact same cap regen?


    That is Average regen, look at the regen time and the cap pool.

  • Dev blog: Looking behind and looking ahead - update from CCP Seagull in EVE Information Center

    I am so glad about this. There seems to be a huge disconnect after each "expansion" we have been having for a year. It started out great with things like Jump Fatigue and other early big changes then it just started looking like "CRAP WE NEED SOMETHING FOR THE PATCH". Moving back to a Big or a few big releases to expect and merging with small changes here and there will really help with maintaining community moral.

    I just wish we would see more things in the Features and Ideas stickied there that we can talk about. Those threads about new structures are nice, but they aren't "here is what we think we may want to do," where we can provide the valuable feed back of statements like "Fozzie, this is crap." But honestly, a more open discussion of various things that may or may not gain traction would be nice. The capital plans are nice, but how about a sticky thread where we can discuss preliminary ideas and get dev feedback on the direction they are thinking?

  • Dev blog: Citadels, sieges and you v2 in EVE Information Center

    Couple of thoughts:

    Use Entosis Link to disable guns on a Citadel (should they be added)
    Use Entosis Link to Raise the DPS Mitigation cap.
    Capital re-balance - Dread damage vs BS+BC and an out of siege damage buff.

  • POS Reaction Link questions in EVE Gameplay Center

    Tau Cabalander wrote:
    For what it is worth, coupling arrays are better for joining structures when you don't need storage.

    They also are great for holding low volume materials, like minerals.


    But in this situation, with booster manufacturing, the couplings cannot hold water, oxygen, hazardous materials, or pure boosters.

  • POS Reaction Link questions in EVE Gameplay Center

    So I let a pos run for a few hours on SISI with 2 reactions. Neither ran. One had only the pure booster as an output link and never entered Online-starting up or other production states. The other had Online Starting up but the process never began as the target silo for water was only anchored.

    I know I should look forward to the new POSs, but really? a production system that doesn't allow loops or trashing?

  • POS Reaction Link questions in EVE Gameplay Center

    Tau Cabalander wrote:


    Can you make a biochemical reaction have an output targeted to an anchored/offline silo and chose to lose the materials?

    Wouldn't even need to route it to an actual structure.


    What do you mean by this? From what I tested, the process would not even run unless the output water has a link to some structure to receive it. It would never enter the "Online - Starting Up" phase after hitting apply.

  • POS Reaction Link questions in EVE Gameplay Center

    Hey Guys, I am hoping someone can answer a couple of questions I have that will save me hours of testing.

    In a BioChem reaction like Standard Bluepills, we have 2 inputs and 2 outputs. 100 water and 20 Amber Cyto in and 95 water and 15 Pure STD Blue Pills come out.
    In an Improved blue pill, we need 3 inputs: 15 Pure STD Blue pill, 15 Pure STD Crash, and 100 oxygen and have 2 outputs: 12 Pure improved Blue pill and 95 Oxygen.
    (numbers might be wrong, doing this off memory)

    So this is about the water an oxygen.

    I know we can do a setup where each input has a silo and each output also has a silo, with the exception of the pure STD Pills going to a reactor to become improved blue pills. Also, each silo can only have 1 input or 1 output, so any silo sending out material cannot also receive it.
    For example, these setups will not work:
    Silo1 > Reactor1 > Silo2 > Silo1
    Silo1 > Reactor1 > Silo2 > Reactor2 > Silo1
    Silo1 | Silo2 > Reactor1 | Reactor2 > Silo3 (Reactors share the same output) target

    This means I am stuck with a the only possibility being
    2 Silos into a reactor with 2 linked outputs (2 silos or 1 silo and 1 reactor).

    So my first question is this:

    Quote:
    Can you make a biochemical reaction have an output targeted to an anchored/offline silo and chose to lose the materials?


    Now my Second question:
    Quote:
    If I offline a silo (say the destination Hazardous Silo) mid process and then re-online it within 5 minutes, does that hour cycle become a loss? Assume I am off/onlining it well before the end of the cycle.

  • Notice: Investgation and Prize Item Freeze for Teams in ATXIII in EVE Communication Center

    Wow....I must say CCP, I am actually surprised you cared to do something. Usually Meta gaming like this is approved. Granted I don't know if there was any "cheating" involved such as a true A or B team, but I did hear about two teams collaborating together.

    I applaud you for preventing further trading until an investigation is done, and actually investigating.