EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2009-01-01 08:27
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-11-07 21:49
  • Number of Posts: 50
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 21

Umino Iruka

Security Status -2.6

Last 20 Posts

  • Aeon model in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Rivr Luzade wrote:
    Umino Iruka wrote:
    So, now that the chimera has been made all pretty and modern...can you guys finally fix the aeon model so it doesn't look like a makeshift asymetricall repurposed station plate?

    GET YOUR HANDS OF THE AEON!Evil Only people residing on the lower end of the intelligence spectrum* ask for a change to the Aeon model. People who understand the purpose of this design, however, appreciate the model. Since you belong to the first category, I'll explain it to you and the new CCP designers, just in case they get stupid ideas: The Aeon is a fortress on the battlefield, an impenetrable wall behind which fighters and fighter bombers can find shelter for repairs/rearming without having to fear attacks from enemies, and they can launch and land behind this massive wall without having to worry of getting shot by sniper ships (who have a very easy job at doing so on the Nyx, for instance), because the Aeon acts way behind the front lines and has an entire fleet of ships between itself and the enemy. The reason why *PROTLEOTIS ask for changes to this extremely practical model is because the dumb capsuleers do not know how to properly place their ships and just dumpster everything into one ball on the field like apes.

    If anything, the Aeon just needs a bit of modernization and crisping-up its shape, but the overall model of the ship must remain as it is because it is extremely practical and meaningful.

    Well, I'm sure if you ask nicely, CCP can implement a ship model roll-back option for role-playing forum warrior retards like you!

  • [MAY] Blood Raider Capitals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So...2 turret hardpoints on the dread and a 25% capital energy turret dmg role bonus....

  • Aeon model in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So, now that the chimera has been made all pretty and modern...can you guys finally fix the aeon model so it doesn't look like a makeshift asymetricall repurposed station plate?

  • [March] Rorqual and Mining changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This has nothing to do with rorquals mining too much.

    THIS, is CCP's laziness and stupid game design coming back to bite us all in the ass!

    The first obvious thing here is the mexallon bottleneck and nothing being done about it. The gneiss roids deplete over 3 times faster than ABC's and spodumain - fix the damn thing already and keep an eye on arkonor and bistot so we don't face the same bottleneck in megacyte.

    The second, and perhaps more important problem here are mineral sinks. You remember those idiotic 20bil dreads, 75bil supers and 265bil titans (production costs) that no one really wants? Well guess what? Those could have been an amazing mineral sink if they were affordable enough to go mainstream. If they all cost double what their t1 counterparts cost, everyone would want one (having all types of pirate capitals available would help immensely as well - pirate carriers anyone?) and the gears of industry would turn once again. None of that would matter of course, if their blueprints aren't readily available in the game as well.

    Structures could have had their mineral requirements increased as well to help with spending minerals - destruction of those could have helped a lot as well, but as it stands, citadels only managed to screw the small groups with their extra reinforcement timers and not being vulnerable to dread bombs like POS's and if the trend continues and drilling platforms get the same dps cap mechanic and another reinforcement timer, the only thing that's gonna increase is the rate of burnt out players in the game (maybe we could all turn to alpha clones and forget this end-game foolishness instead?).

    So what could be done about all this? It would take CCP getting off their lazy asses and actually producing something for a change. The current rate of releasing pirate caps means all the pirate factions will get covered by the end of this decade (not if they want to do mordu's boyz, sisters and rogue drones as well - in that case, add another 2 years to the road map for pirate caps).

    Let's not forget that all the models for these pirate caps (it's probably more correct to say skins rather than models but whatever) are already done, all it takes is giving them some traits and releasing them - even though the laziness goes so far that we aren't even getting all of the capital types on each pirate faction...

    And what is the intended fix for this laziness? Forget for a moment that the rorqual never did anything for lowsec people because mining is a complete waste of time in low. So now the 11bil mining capital is being dumbed down to the level of a sanctum running carrier in null - I mean, CCP obviously wants people out of hisec and in low and null/wh, but it would be a real travesty if a capital miner in null is making more money than a hisec incursion F1 monkey.

    Also....0 max locked targets at PANIC activation fixes all other issues, takes a real genius to figure that one out!

  • Pirate caps in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Cap ITal wrote:
    they are a isk sink.
    Status symbol.

    nothing more.

    the dread could do with being looked at. maybe. It's not much of a status symbol at 30bil and it's entirely terrible. It maybe should have a build cost buff to 50bill and get a crazy bonus like a siege mode you can move and warp with but not dock. or something equally absurd. Or siege mode does not limit it's ability to be remote repped.

    As for the titan and Super. They are fine. massive status symbols. and they will survive being primed just as well as their t1 counterparts. Maybe another 200% to the extender and plate bonus but thats all i would add.

    Look, I understand you're trying to act all knowledgeable about all this, but you just burned yourself with this post.

    First of all, isk sinks are places where players buy stuff/services from NPC's (LP stores, skillbooks, repairs etc....).

    Second, even if these pirate caps were imagined as status symbols (which is just not true), status symbols are useless if they're not being shown which means USED. And pirate caps are definitely NOT being used for these few months after they got released.

  • Pirate caps in EVE Technology and Research Center

    almost fiction wrote:
    The main issue for me is the cost. All other pirate caps mineral cost is similar to others in it's class. It's added value comes from it being more powerful and the BPC rarity.

    It's a shame they went in another direction with these pirate caps, making their cost far outweigh their value.

    Yeah true, also speaking of prices....

    What's with the recent CCP policy of punishing high skill pilots, the costs of t2 capital guns and t2 fighters are not even funny.

  • Pirate caps in EVE Technology and Research Center


    I have a few questions which I didn't really know where to post so they ended up here - would love a dev answer if possible...

    What is going on with pirate capitals?

    You released serpentis caps a few months ago with the carrier missing from the package for some mysterious and unknowable reasons.

    Since then, serpentis dread has filled around 3 pages on zkill, most of it done by one person who ended up losing it with a lot of drama (killboard can sometimes make your eyes bleed, but it's numbers don't lie).

    Not long after the serpentis caps were released you made a small effort to make the dread LESS exciting than what it was originally intended by reducing it's build costs somewhat which was a bad thing, because who wouldn't want to feel the adrenaline rush of locking a 40+bil ship into place for 5 minutes when sieging???

    All sarcasm aside, in the few months since they were released, serpentis caps saw amazingly little use:

    dread: about 3 pages
    supercarrier: 2 placeholder kills made to announce to the eve community that they exist in the game
    titan: 0 (zero) - production problems, or something else?

    Now the Crimson Harvest is active again, a perfect opportunity to introduce blood raider caps (maybe this time not excluding the carrier?), and....nothing. All of the pirate caps are already made (all the models already exist which is seen by capital NPC spawns) with very little effort involved in making them - angel dreads are naglfar hull models, and the sansha's nation dread is a revelation with a 4th turret hardpoint which, by the way, looks like someone put a saddle on a cow.

    Is your intention to continue the tradition of dragging your feet when it comes to releasing new things?
    I hope you're not planning on releasing one pirate faction per year since they are not popular because someone imagined them as content for 0.1% of eve population, or just scrapping any future development around pirate caps like you did with walking in stations!

    The ship tiercide, a thing that's been dragging for YEARS now, is nothing more than changing variable values of ship/module stats, nothing new is being developed in it, but after all this time, it's still not completed!!! Ships are still waiting for the balance pass (not to mention 'black sheep' ships like the munin which are crying for a buff/rework).

    I've tried my best not to make a toxic thread about these questions, but there's no other way to describe this lack of effort...

    Am I the only crazy one here, or are there others who hear the voices too?

  • Return all ships to at least 3.0 AU warp speed. Dev PLEASE read. in EVE Technology and Research Center


    The main issue here is that the current battleship meta is choking smaller pvp groups heavily - smaller groups who don't have 50 people on standby 24/7 so that they can all just fly swarms of T3 dessies or pirate/t2 frigates.

    When it comes to small scale PvP and roams in general, you need fast response ships (they don't even have to be kitey) with enough dps to deal with fights before you get blobbed - something battleships are very capable of doing (including being able to take a hit) except they are too slow to get there in time to be of any use.

    So, in order to fix that, you HAVE to fit two T2 hyperspatial rigs to achieve 3AU/s warp speed and what ever agility mods are needed to cut your align time to 8 seconds or preferably less - which is basically trying to turn every battleship in the game into a Machariel...of course, if you do that on an actual Machariel, you get 4.5AU/s speed before any implants....

    Slow align and warp speed is also plaguing most battlecruisers which are faster than t1 battleships, but also have fewer fitting slots so it's pretty much the same thing fitting 2 hyperspatials on a BS and 1 hyperspatial on a BC in terms of fit gimping.

    While I don't believe all battleships should be fast and agile like the Mach, I believe CCP should make further distinction between attack battleships and combat battleships - combat battleships staying slow as they are right now, but attack battleships gaining better agility and warp speed (notice I'm not asking for more sublight speed, only alignment and warp speed).

    3.3AU/s for command ships
    3AU/s for attack battlecruisers
    2.75AU/s for marauders and blops
    2.5AU/s for combat battlecruisers
    2.5AU/s for attack battleships
    2AU/s for combat battleships

    The Machariel would still be king of the hill for kiting and warp speed and agility and hyperspatial rigs would still be a thing, but other battleships and battlecruisers whose ROLE is speed and firepower would have an easier time actually getting to a fight before it's already over.

    Would be nice flying more than one ship and not feel like you're doing it wrong, right?

  • UICON is recruiting -- Lowsec PVP & Piracy [EU/US tz] in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    Still looking for people...

  • [Citadels] Carriers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I don't even know where to begin...

    Who came up with these idiotic changes anyway?

    40km signature resolution on all dread guns??? A super carrier can now speed tank a dread WITHOUT a prop mod....

    Amarr and Caldari carriers are missing a bonus? Those fighter E-war bonuses are completely useless anyway - Nidhoggur's stupid 2.5% bonus to fighter speed is actually better than all of the fighter E-war bonuses from all the carriers combined (even though 2.5% bonus to anything is just bullshit).

    Are you trying to tell us training carrier skills to L5 is useless now? Because if you are, it's working nicely - x12 carrier skill for 5% more range on the E-war fighters? Seriously? Not to mention you can only launch one support squadron...

    T2 E-war fighters have 10km range. so yes, let us train an x12 skill for 500m more range!!!
    It's not enough that we got 2 more idiotic x12 skills to grind, we should definitely have less benefits from carrier L5 skills as well....

    But fear NOT!!! Amarr and Caldari carriers are actually MISSING a bonus, yes! The 2 carriers where you actually accepted the fact that 2.5% doesn't really mean anything....

    And, of course, carrier dps values are misteriously absent from the test server...even though everyone feels it's complete and utter **** now...

    Really great job everyone at destroying carriers completely!!!

  • [March] Heavy Stasis Grapplers in EVE Technology and Research Center

    If your intention here is to REALLY help battleships, the range on these things needs to be fixed.

    The fitting requirements for this thing AND the fact that it's supposed to be exclusive for battleships and larger ships, means it actually needs to have decent stats or these will get used only during the initial hype when they get released (much like target spectrum breakers).

    Get out of your current train of thought which pushes you to give us useless things or conditionally useful things!

    We don't need size specific webs which perform worse than their normal variants - add the current overheat range bonus into it's normal range value and reduce the overheat bonus to something like 50% (T2 = 4km unheated optimal + 10km falloff and 6km heated optimal + 10km falloff) - it also wouldn't hurt to add 1-2 km extra falloff on faction variants either because no hull/boost bonuses are allowed....

    This new web type is not a bad idea, but I really feel you need to start fixing hulls and weapon systems/ammo types instead of inventing hull dependant modules which are supposed to do it instead. You are destroying much of the fitting varieties by forcing certain modules to be fitted onto certain hulls just to make the hulls viable to use.

  • UICON is recruiting -- Lowsec PVP & Piracy [EU/US tz] in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    Still recruiting!

  • UICON is recruiting -- Lowsec PVP & Piracy [EU/US tz] in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    Still recruiting!

  • UICON is recruiting -- Lowsec PVP & Piracy [EU/US tz] in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    Free *****-slapping cybernetic arm for successful applicants

    (until supply runs out)


  • Damage profiles by ship group and weapon type in 2015 in EVE Information Center

    And so far, no one is really bothered that the laser damage type is by far the dimmest column in the chart?

    The "elegant" weapon system that can swap crystal type at a moment's notice and can project damage very well is the one that is used the least....

    It's a simple fix:

    50% energy turret capacitor usage reduction for all amarr laser boats as a role bonus and replace any existing cap usage reduction bonuses with a proper ship bonus. (laser boats with a marauder style setup of half the usual turret count and 100% damage bonus obviously have that already implemented, even though both sansha and blood raider ship lines need some more fitting and capacitor related love)

    The price we currently pay for using lasers is too high for laser boats to be interesting enough to players - like the inability to swap damage type and the insane cap usage lasers have is not enough, but we also have extremely mediocre laser hulls with that stupid energy turret capacitor usage reduction bonus that is just stealing the spot for a proper ship bonus....

  • [December] Balance Smorgasbord in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP Fozzie wrote:

    The Barghest is underperforming a tad in our eyes, so this change provides a slight DPS buff at high skill levels (9 effective launchers vs the previous 8.75) while providing a second utility high.
  • -1 Launcher (second utility high)
  • Change damage bonus to 10% per level

  • As we keep working and incorporate feedback, it's very possible that some of these changes may be adjusted or removed, or that more could be added. This is also not the complete list of balance changes coming this Winter, keep an eye on this forum section for the latest updates.

    We really want to hear your feedback on these proposals. Let us know what you think!

How about you give us an extra mid slot instead of that 2nd utility high? A Rattlesnake for example, has a tanking bonus as well as 7 mid slots, and the Barghest is kinda expected to be able to fit both long and short point which leaves only 4 slots for prop mod(s) and tank....god forbid if anyone got an idea to fit a missile tracking comp or two....

  • [December] Missile Disruptors and Tweaks to Missile Guidance Mods in EVE Technology and Research Center

    This is stupid!

    "Let's add a different module and different scripts in a fake attempt to actually bring the Amarr E-war up to snuff..."

    Integrate the damn missile tracking disruption effects into the existing modules and scripts and stop trying to re-invent the light bulb!

  • The need for more NPC null pockets in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I totally support this idea, fixing the LP stores of ******/useless npc null entities, and adding more NPC nullsec.

    Venal needs more stations and agents
    Mordu's legion needs at least 3 more constellations with stations and agents
    SOE also need at least 3 more constellations with stations and agents
    Syndicate needs a non-useless LP store
    ORE needs more stations, agents and a decent LP store
    Fountain Serpentis NPC space needs at least 2 more constellations with stations and agents
    Blood Raiders need lots of buffs as their LP store is completely useless, more constellations, more stations and more agents
    Stain is fine as it is more or less
    Curse is also fine
    Great wildlands needs like....20 stations or so, with agents and a rework of the almost useless LP store

    But even if all these changes I wrote were to happen (which is doubtful as CCP is incredibly lazy about everything) we are still left with huge parts of space on the eastern side of the galaxy map which have no NPC nullsec at all.

    It would be the perfect opportunity to introduce Equilibrium of Mankind NPC faction somwhere around the south east of the map, I'm thinking Detorid -> Tenerifis -> Feythabolis -> Omist. There is PLENTY of space there where an aditional NPC nullsec region could be. The idea could be easily brought to life, EoM would provide us with shield based, rail oriented Amarr hulls (probably amarr-optimal + caldari-damage bonuses) and perhaps a shield version of slave implants?

    The Drone regions also need an NPC nullsec region, settled somwhere between Oasa and Outer passage - Rogue drones finally decided that they want capsuleer assistance and as such, have adapted their hives to accomodate capsuleers - the station models could easily be those Rogue drone hives we blow up on missions, the model is there, no special artwork needs doing, it just needs to be turned into a station and perhaps go as far as to make a few normal station models with special "infested" kinda look to them...they would provide those lovely infested ship hulls, the infested Domi is already there, they would just need to come up with a cruiser and a frigate hull which could easily be borrowed from current Rogue drone models, or just make a new cruiser and frigate hull for them (it could be another deep space oriented vessel line, amarr-laser damage + gallente-armor repair bonus) and an armor version of crystal implant set...

    All these things can be achieved with very little work, all the tools and models are already present in the game, it just takes some good will to make it happen.

  • Faction standing and diplomacy problems in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I'll try and keep this short.

    I feel that negative faction standings are too difficult to mend for no good reason (as in: this adds nothing to the game except a mind numbing and an extremely lengthly grind).

    Allow the actual FACTION standing increase to be shared among fleet members, not just the corp standing you get with the storyline agent's corporation.

    Also, Diplomacy skill, as useful is it is, is a mirror image of Connections skill but the way it works doesn't help in mending bad standing because any standing increases affect the BASE standing, not the DERIVED standing. That means for example, if your character has -10.00 base standing with a certain faction, he will have -6.00 derived standing after diplomacy L5 kicks in, but this also means that any standing increases the character may get affect the -10.00 standing which is almost impossible to move to "managable" levels.

    So instead, make it so that Diplomacy also prevents your base negative standing from going past certain negative values which are determined by the diplomacy skill level - for exmple:

    L1 diplo : negative BASE standings toward NPC agents, corps and factions cannot go below -8.00
    L2 diplo : negative BASE standings toward NPC agents, corps and factions cannot go below -7.50
    L2 diplo : negative BASE standings toward NPC agents, corps and factions cannot go below -7.00
    L2 diplo : negative BASE standings toward NPC agents, corps and factions cannot go below -6.50
    L2 diplo : negative BASE standings toward NPC agents, corps and factions cannot go below -6.00

    What is the point of all of this?

    Less mind numbing standing related grind and allowing faction standing to be shared among fleet members will not only reduce the grind even further, but promote team play among players in this PvE aspect.

  • How would EVE break if we removed skills altogether? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
    Nasar Vyron wrote:
    Umino Iruka wrote:
    See, for some reason that is known only to you, you keep deluding yourself - YOU DID NOT HELP HIM, that guy was helping YOU, you were nothing more than a drain on his profits, especially if he was using sentries (sentries blap mission frigates very, very well).

    The entire profit you two made was split evenly while he was in a battleship, doing all the heavy lifting with range and dps, while you were flying around pretending to be useful. Being a partner to a combat pilot who is making money through either missions or anomalies or whatever is when you have a proper ship to bring in to help out, when your dps and damage application are at least similar, not when you're in a t1 frigate.

    His friend was being nice letting him tag along. He was obviously helping Corraidhin make more isk than he could on his own. More damage in a site is more damage no matter how you look at it so it was speeding him up kind of. Some people let maximizing their profits go out the window every now and then to help a new player or friend. I am guessing you are not one of those types of people.

    EVE as a whole would be a lot better off with more players like his friend there to meet new players. A lot more than these ideas of removing skills/implants or allowing for reallocation of SP. EVE is a social game, yet most of the people left are so anti-social we just scare off any new players telling them they're not good enough or will never be as good as a vet when that's not at all true.

    To perfectly fly any particular sub-cap does not take more than a couple months. Vets will never get any better than 5s, nor will the rookie player. And in small gang/solo roams that 2% difference between 4 and 5 is made up for simply by who shoots who first.

    Exactly this. Did he need me there? Of course not, but I didn't take anyof the LP or mission reward because I didn't feel I'd earnt it but every now and then split the reward. I did indeed speed up his missions as I took out frigates etc whilst he kept his heavy guns on task with no need to swap out drones. He was surprised himself about how useful it was to have someone along (and the banter did help a lot too, social interaction in an MMO? Who'd have thought it!)

    He benefited greatly by fitting one to two more missions in each session. I benefitted from better meta crap to fit on my ship whilst I trained up and also learnt about my ships and skills in a significantly more dangerous environment for a noob than level 1 missions would provide.

    I got lucky with my first corp mates. Because of them I learnt how my ships and skills worked. Because of them I advanced much more rapidly than I would have expected. I was building control towers after 8-10 weeks, how is that not having a useful impact in the game no matter how small?

    The key isn't to remove skills, give more SP or give more money. They key to this game is social interaction and that is where player *and* CCP focus should be to draw in and retain new players.

    Helping new bros is not the subject of this, you are just trying to divert the subject once it became clear your argument had no foundation in reality.

    And for your information, I helped a lot of people during my eve career, -snip-