EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2006-03-13 02:45
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 22:49
  • Number of Posts: 1,567
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

TigerXtrm

Security Status 5.0
  • GoonWaffe Member since
  • Goonswarm Federation Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Question about jump freighters in EVE Communication Center

    J-Space Chick wrote:
    Hi,

    I'm thinking about buying one... it will be used mostly for getting stuff to/from tradehubs to different low sec systems within 15 jumps of Jita. The value of the cargo will be always around 3-4B.

    Now I think a Jump Freighter with 3-4B cargo will be killed very fast in Jita. So I wonder what is the max value to safely use it in Jita?

    And how would you handle a higher value? Jump to a HS a few jumps out of Jita and move it in smaller pieces to Jita with DST or Orca?


    You can't jump to high-sec, only from. For that trip to Jita you'll have to traverse multiple gates.

  • New loki stats on test server, mostly good, but something very bad. in EVE Communication Center

    Mhari Dson wrote:
    TigerXtrm wrote:
    Kisar wrote:
    Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

    This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

    Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

    So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

    I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


    Holy sh*t, you mean you can't have the best of everything at once? Holy sh*t CCP how dare you.


    Holy S#itposting fatman! And coming from the center of the largest alliance in the F*ck eve over for anyone but us category.

    Seriously, BOB was better than goon ever will be, at least they just ignored the small groups instead of purposefully antagonizing/attacking them.


    You seem triggered. Sit down before you hurt yourself.

  • New loki stats on test server, mostly good, but something very bad. in EVE Communication Center

    Kisar wrote:
    Unless you want to have only 3 mid slots on your Loki, you need to fit the Wake Limiter propulsion upgrade. The trouble is it comes with garbage stats. 10% afterburner increase per level, 10% reduction in mwd sig penalty. +2 mid slots. Fit this and you'll have 5 mid slots which is very important, even the minimum required for shield tanks. End fit is 5 mid slots 5 lo slots.

    This makes it really bad because you gain very little from this propulsion upgrade over the other, better one, the Loki Propulsion - Intercalated Nanofires - which gives you 7.5% agility per level, 5% max velocity per level, and +2 lo slots. Nice bonuses but now you'll have 7 lo slots and 3 mid slots. Which ruins this for shield tanks because they cannot use this at all with only 3 mid slots.

    Plan to run afterburner? Not to worry, won't even miss the 50% afterburner speed bonus from the Wake Limiter, because your afterburner speed is virtually as fast anyway thanks to the velocity bonus. And MWD? Much faster again.

    So looks like you have to choose between 3 mid slots 7 lo slots with slick agility and speed or 5 mid slots 5 lo slots with much worse agility and speed. If you plan to use shield you don't even get a real choice because you're forced to pick the Wake Limiter for the +2 mid slots.

    I don't know how to fix this. I guess armor loki is going to be significantly faster and more agile than shield loki.


    Holy sh*t, you mean you can't have the best of everything at once? Holy sh*t CCP how dare you.

  • Oi, Oi, Oi - CONCORD Ships in EVE Communication Center

    ISD Max Trix wrote:
    Ergum Motsu wrote:
    ISD Max Trix wrote:


    So would you like CCP to removed the ships? What is your ideal solution to this situation?



    How about just limit them to 1 of each ship per ticket purchased as originally advertised rather just giving people untold amount of isk?

    I mean just look at jita and see how much the ships are trading for atm because they are supposedly rare due to supposedly limited availability



    So remove all the ships and then reissue them? What about the ones already sold? Should CCP reverse all the sales? Also if you check the video I originally posted. They are not rare ships.

    Kixx wrote:


    Immediate release of Concord ships in game by some easy obtainable means otherwise instead of addressing the problem you have decided to become an accomplice by ignoring it.


    You seem to have a misconception about my role. I am a player Volunteer whos job it is to moderate the forums and filter feedback to CCP. I am trying to get an understanding of what the issue is and what players would like to happen. So I am not sure where you are getting this "Accomplice by ignoring it" from.


    The issue isn't the ships, nor is it a problem that Fanfest attendees got an early taste. The problem is the fact that CCP knowns damn well that anything they hand out at Fanfest has a super high value at first and that they decided to knowingly give ships to hundreds of accounts belonging to the same person. Just the act of giving highly valuable items to accounts that aren't even subscribed is completely mind boggling.

    There are people currently out there who exploited Alpha clones to such a state that they have already cashed in billions, if not trillions of ISK thanks to this monumental f*ckup. Does it inject ISK into the economy? No. Is it fair? No. No-one complaining about Fanfest attendees getting a gift that happens to be worth a few hundred million or a billion. What happened here is that one person was given so many 'rare' ships that they got a cash injection of close to a trillion ISK as a direct result of CCP's actions.

    If CCP refuses to see how this is a problem, god help us all.

    So yes, put some effort into fixing this and

    1. Remove all CONCORD ships that were given out from the game.

    2. Revert every single transaction that involved one of those ships.

    3. Then give them out again, once per ticket. As it should have been done in the first place.

    4. And if that makes them 'too rare' just seed them into the game via alternative means.

    But the situation as it currently stands is completely unacceptable.

  • EVE-Monument in Reykjavik in a bad state in EVE Communication Center

    There's only so much you can do against the effects of salt water, wind, rain, snow. Maybe for EVE's 20th birthday they can replace all the tiles with updated names and such.

  • A few 'corrections' to current structure mechanics in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Part of the issue CCP will have with "no asset safety" is how it's always been a marketing point for them that if you came back after you had left for however long, you always had a way to get your stuff back by jumping through arbitrary number of hoops unless it was in a WH. Removing asset safety kills this.


    No one is talking about removing asset safety Straight

    Quote:
    You seem to be off searching for a problem for this solution.


    The biggest problem, in my mind anyway, is that the medium structures especially are too easy to throw around, even for smaller entities. A Raitaru costs only 600m and provides all the comforts of a present day station, including tethering. And ask anyone who's been involved in this, even taking down a Raitaru is annoying to do because of the timer bullshit. Another 'problem' is that cheap structures make movement of capitals way too easy, though admittedly this already being looked into by CCP in the form of tether restrictions after using a jump drive.

    In any case it is my personal belief that there should be some commitment to owning a structure. It shouldn't be something you just throw down and forget about until you happen to need it as a safe spot one day. And again, this is especially true for the medium structures. Large and up are pretty much commitments for their price alone. But a 600m structure is nothing, even for small corps. Hell, even most solo players can sneeze and have enough money for one.

    Point is, the basic functions of any structure (docking, asset safety, tether, fitting, insurance) are incredibly powerful in terms of gameplay for a one-off investment of only 600m. To me it doesn't make sense that such powerful tools come essentially for free for unlimited time without any serious responsibility or further commitment on the owner's part.

    Quote:
    They're also replacing Outposts, which have no Fuel costs. Does that mean they should or shouldn't have fuel cost?


    If you want to get technical, the mediums replace POS' and the large replace Outposts. So apply this plan only to mediums, problem solved.

  • CCP Not Even Pretending. in EVE Communication Center

    Ima Wreckyou wrote:
    Inb4 some serious spin-doctoring about why this is not a blantant pay2win ad and absolutely no problem.


    This isn't pay to win.

    You have to win with what you buy to make it pay to win. 99% of the people buying PLEX for ships lose them almost instantly.

  • A few 'corrections' to current structure mechanics in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Structures are great, but as a full replacement for POS' I think they need a couple of changes to make the gameplay more interesting. In short a structure should lose a number of strategic benefits when there is no fuel in the structure. In addition just having a structure online should consume fuel. POS' consume fuel, so why not structures?

    Structures should use a minimal amount of fuel on their own, but fuel non the less. Say 1 per hour for med, 2 per hour for large and 4 per hour for extra large.

    Proposed ideas, when there is no fuel in the structure:


    1. Tether doesn't work, period.
    2. Shield reinforcement timer is skipped completely.
    3. Weapon systems go offline
    4. Damage cap is removed/increased


    Adding fuel to the fuel bay would instantly bring everything back online, with the exception of the shield timer if the structure is already being attacked (and this in the repair cycle) at that moment.

    Not only would this make owning a structure a little bit more of an (time) investment, it would make it much easier to destroy structures that are abandoned or otherwise left unattended. In addition this almost perfectly mirrors the way POS' currently work. If a POS is without fuel weapons go offline, shield goes offline and you can't safely sit around the stick.

    A mere 600m structure should not provide the advantages it does if you can't even be committed to keeping it online.

  • [June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Altair Taurus wrote:
    I suppose next month's Fozzie brilliant idea would be re-spawn timers for high-end null-sec ratting anomalies: Forsaken Hub - 10 minutes, Haven - 20 minutes, Sanctum - 30 minutes. Twisted


    Would be hilarious. Do it.

  • [June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Antal Marius wrote:
    Sir Marksalot wrote:
    Ktall Daganael wrote:
    CCP... your problem is not the rorqual... your problem is the indecent mutiboxing. When a single RL personne can deploy almost 60 rorquals on field... that's your problem. overall, with this nerf, you'll cut about 12% yield (including speed nerf), what do you think all big-alliance-multiboxer-anom-killer rorq pilots will do ? they just gonna add some more rorq. until you nerf it to the point where sp/isk cost vs yield ratio will be so dumb we all mine in exhumer again.

    you want to fix this amount of ore we goons mine every month ? find a way to limit (not prevent) multiboxing and then play with that lmit until you're happy with the ecomony and player don't want to kill you too much.



    Except that extremely long anom respawns are just going to kill 0.0 mining entirely. You can't add another rorqual to mine an anom that isn't there.



    We're just going to see large fleets of rorquals moving from system to system


    And thus have more risk of getting caught somehow, and thus introducing more content, thus making EVE a better place for everyone.

    Meanwhile my fellow Goons are a little over represented in the crying department. Goons push game mechanics until the absolute limit until CCP sees reason. It's been this way for years, it will be for years to come. Delve has and still will be a liquid ISK printer. The amount of ore being mined since the Rorqual buff is stupid. The amount of caps being built since the Rorqual buff is stupid. Fun, yes. But stupid for the overall health of the game. There's a reason the Thukker array lost its ME bonus as well.

    Going out on a limb here, but I'm going to say that CCP has a better top down view of the economy and a much clearer vision of how they think it should be working than any of us ever will. So if they say something needs a nerf to save the economy I'm inclined to believe them.

    Also stop shooting the messenger. Just because Fozzie posts these things doesn't mean he's the sole person coming up with this stuff.

  • Bounty on my head, how does it works? in EVE Communication Center

    It doesn't. Next!

  • Received a mail from CCP. in EVE Communication Center

    Khelladan wrote:
    hello!

    just received a mail with the following:

    Quote:
    You are part of New Eden's history

    Quote:
    ON THE HOUSE, FOREVER!
    PLAY EVE ONLINE FOR FREE

    Greetings Khelladan,

    Enjoy EVE Online for free! You can access many popular ships, skills and modules. Take part in fleet battles, player-run corporations or just explore New Eden.

    Join in the celebrations for Capsuleer Day and claim your free pod skin gift in the process.


    PLAY NOW
    SKIN giveaway ends 21 May


    Fly safe and free!

    - The EVE Online Dev Team


    i know that the words "on the house" and "forever" are pretty strong and imply that you get something for free. which eve now is to some extent. but does this mail mean that i just am able to play EVE like every other f2p player? if so.. well, i got mails for that and information, too.

    somehow i thought that this would mean some lifelong omega sub, which would be crazy tbh.

    anyway. i am curious. this thing just came out of nowhere. please help me understand the context. :)


    I had the same thought when I read it. Very unfortunate (and probably purposefully) choice of words.

  • [119.6] Fleet QoL improvements and more little things from Five 0 in EVE Technology and Research Center

    As for structures, would it be possible to somehow show what structure generated a certain wallet entry? For example I operate two refineries, I'd like to be able to see which one is being used more by other players. Maybe show this in the tooltip?

  • New pod skin doesn't apply to the Gold Pod in EVE Communication Center

    Thank you CCP for this completely useless gift. It's like you're just making a point rubbing our noses in the fact that pod skins are completely and utterly useless in any scenario and that NO ONE can use them.

    I'm not usually one to be ungrateful about free stuff. But if you're gonna gift us something, make sure it f*cking works. It's not like this is a new thing either. We've been telling you about this since the Palantine pod skin.

  • What is the general "health" of this game? Subs? New players, etc? in EVE Communication Center

    Slick Executioner wrote:
    I am LOVING this game, although three days in I realize I barely u der stand it all.

    With that said, what is the overall status of the game? Are more people playing now than ever before (with the f2p option now)?

    Are there a ton of new players joining?

    Just curious.

    Thanks!


    EVE has been dying for exactly 5072 days and will continue to die well into the future.

  • Rotate anchored structures in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cade Windstalker wrote:
    Would probably be easier/less abusable for it to change during downtime.

    I think it would be fine so long as it's fairly heavily restricted so you can't just swap it around on a whim.

    The one probably that occurs to me is messing up bookmarks, bubbles, ect and potentially ending up with something inside the structure or creating other problems in that way.


    Not sure how it would mess with any of those things, really. What I'm talking about is just rotating the structure on its own axis, not moving it to a different location or up or down or anything like that. It would stay anchored, the only thing you'd be able to change is what way the undock is pointing.

  • Rotate anchored structures in EVE Technology and Research Center

    One of those small things, but so insanely useful if it were possible. Sometimes you just make a mistake while anchoring, or things change in a way that you want the undock of a structure to point elsewhere. Please let us change the rotation of a structure every X days (maybe for a fee, I dunno). And gradually change the rotation over the course of 24/48/whatever hours. Or, if that's too large of a technological hurdle, have it changed after downtime.

    Either way, would be a real quality of life thing to have :)

  • here is an idea in EVE Communication Center

    Cybertherion wrote:
    TigerXtrm wrote:
    So there is, in fact, a bigger change the QC will be removed all together instead of it being rolled out to structures.


    Really? Assuming by "change" you mean "chance" that's kinda awful. I'm not a betting person, but I would actually wager that if the avatar thingo hadn't been canned there would be a LOT more players. For all their clever marketing CCP really shot themselves in the foot with that one. I never even worked out why the decision was ever made. Was it server strain or sumfin?


    The player base at the time was heavily opposed to the whole walking avatar idea because it took development time away from things that were much more important (balance, new space content, bugs, etc). It met so much opposition that CCP decided to reconsider the idea and here we are. Ultimately any form of walking in stations would be a fun little bonus thing, but nothing that would influence other parts of the game. There would never be any combat or PVE activities of any sort without a complete rethink of what EVE is. Just the notion of heading in that direction seriously pissed people off, so yeah.

  • here is an idea in EVE Communication Center

    Danome wrote:
    here is an idea for citadels and Complexes and that is to put the captain's Quarters. the stations already have them i do like Captains Quarters . Put them in the Citadels and Complexes


    The new structures purposefully don't have them because they are a relic from an abandoned project. Back then the idea CCP had for new players was "give them a human avatar so it's more relateable when they start the game". With the new NPE CCP actively wants to teach new players that "their ship is their avatar".

    So there is, in fact, a bigger change the QC will be removed all together instead of it being rolled out to structures.

  • FRIGATE OF EVE BOOK- LIMITED EDITION in EVE Communication Center

    CCP Falcon wrote:
    The regular hardcover is still out there and available for pre-order, but limited editions are now few and far between Smile


    I'm actually amazed I got my hands on one.

Forum Signature

My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!

My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums