EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-12-11 09:00
  • First Forum Visit: 2014-01-19 19:58
  • Number of Posts: 909
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 1,254

Vic Jefferson

Security Status 0.3
  • Brand Newbros Member since
  • Test Alliance Please Ignore Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Capital Ship Logistics Afterthought. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Trespasser wrote:
    no, but i do feel that when they make a pass to the jump bridges after they remove pos's.. jump bridges should have a 90% reduction in fatigue.... if not 90 atleast the same as a black ops... 75%.


    or make it so that you can take 4 jump bridges within a time period before fatigue starts to go up.


    This allows alliances to better defend there home but also punishes the creation of "highways" like the CFC had running from Dek all the way down to the bottom of fountain.




    That's exactly the problem - as you grow, it should become harder, not easier to defend your space. AegisSov has, interestingly, made the existing problems worse, where sov only becomes useful to really own for a handful of entities with exceptional scale and largess to really make use of it, rather than adding any sort of friction from unchecked growth and bloat.

    As you decrease the cost to jump bridges (which again is highly, HIGHLY avoidable), you are removing, or at least chipping away any opportunity cost for having more space and being larger.

    Jump bridge should remain a properly costed convenience. Given how amazingly safe and defendable sov is, there ill-needs to be yet another mechanic to harden the defenders advantage.

  • Capital Ship Logistics Afterthought. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Tessa Sage wrote:
    Syllabus Memoriae wrote:
    ... be able to jump further. So like instead of 7-10 LY you could get 14-20 LY but take 4x J-F.

    Or something like that. No idea what might spawn from this idea, but have at it :D


    I can think of the best way to mitigate jump fatigue. Routine hops within blue Sov will not add up, as long as capitals use friendly citadels to tether and recharge their capacitors. The mechanic to change isn't a mobile item but existing anchored waypoints such as Astrahuses and Fortizars. Regardless of whether you can dock, as long as the tether is stable your ship negates its previously accrued jump fatigue in the same span of time as capacitor top off.

    Conversely, extending this benefit to any form of deployment situation beyond friendly sov is going to trigger a visit to Danika's above posted theorem.



    Still grotesquely overpowered. Fatigue is, interestingly, one of the few mechanics which make Sov Null less than perfectly safe for PvE capitals. If capital response fleets had no fatigue from defensively responding, they could always respond to every cyno, all the time, completely eliminating even the small modicum of risk present in null. In a game which the main selling point is risk, having an uncontestable local capital supremacy that is both infintely powerful and infinitely mobile is just out of whack - at least the fatigue adds some cost to this, and there should be some trade offs for using capitals.

    How and why are you jumping so much within your own sov?

  • Dev blog: The future of probe and directional scanning UI in EVE Information Center

    Devian Chase wrote:
    A other angry post !
    This new new dscan and probe scan is utter **** ^^
    the old one is just better in every way .. so thats a half year of wasted programing



    This. Please enable an option for 'Legacy' dscan window.

    I realize that the underlying code for it may be either depreciated or missing from the current build; that's fine, make a gui that looks like the old one on top of having the new trendy one, there was NOTHING wrong with the old one whatsoever, and dscan literally defines 90% of game play.

    I can't even undock and get the information I need to play the game anymore. Everything is just this visual insanity.

    Please program for the Players!

  • Advanced Audio Settings Changes in EVE Information Center

    One step forward, 10 steps back.

    New Dscan window is absolutely a disaster; please, please PLEASE let us turn the dang sounds off!

    I can't help but feel the people designing this stuff don't actually play the game. Do you realize how annoying it is to hear the same sound once a second, every second? Do you even DSCAN?

  • Assault Frigate Role Ideas in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Serendipity Lost wrote:
    CSM folks should have an open mind AND not immediately degrade to personal attacks. I'd like you to settle a wager me and the guys have.


    :shrug:

    The CSM candiate who got the most votes doesn't seem to mind insulting most of the player base, or find the behavior beneath the post. Suitonia was a goon when elected, and that seems par for the course for them.

  • [PVP, PVE, and Mining] Making protecting miners content for everyone in EVE Technology and Research Center

    TheGuy Akachi wrote:
    New module to help encourage guarding miners in belt.


    Nullsec doesn't really have a problem with guarding their miners at all. Honestly it is sort of funny how miners are worth full super fleets as personal guards but other ratting ships are left to defend themselves.

    Basically, the module does not appear to add anything to the game; protecting mining ops is already a common practice in areas of the game where mining is actually very profitable. If you want protecting mining ops to be personally profitable, or have your ops be guarded, I suggest you move to null.

  • Assault Frigate Role Ideas in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So, when/if CCP finally addresses capital proliferation, AFs will once again have no niche?

    I think you are trying to force AFs to be the relieve a symptom of another problem, when in fact they should be useful in their own right.

    Hictors, for example, went from being dedicated captial tacklers to being useful in many settings, and this is widely regarded as a good thing. Why do you want to confine AFs into a niche that honestly shouldn't exist in the first place? I find it very strange that someone who reports to be a PvP enthusiast is of such limited imagination.

  • Limit CYNO capability to specific ships! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    What is your new cyno supposed to do differently to be a meaningful choice like the hull energizer?


    Before the changes to hull base resists, every ship fit a damage control with very few exceptions. It was a required module to undock in basically almost every situation, thus was not really a choice to fit or not - it was almost never worth forgoing.

    The same can be said for cynos on caps. It's not meant to have different functionality, it's meant to make fitting one a choice and a compromise with something, rather than something which is not a choice and doesn't actually present the player with real decision. 50tf and 20MW to basically be untouchable is not really a good game mechanic.

  • Limit CYNO capability to specific ships! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    Vic Jefferson wrote:
    Half the point of a good cyno ship is that they don't look like a good cyno ship. Cynos would lose value if you could always see them coming. Considering how broken local is, cynos are the only counter balance.

    Limiting what ships can use it is a bad idea. However, the more serious question is, should it be harder to fit on some ships? They aren't really a fitting choice on capitals because the fitting requirements are so low for what it gives you. Everything in EvE should be a choice. Capital ships have capital everything else now, why not capital cynos?


    They cost you a slot. That in itself is a choice.

    If you were to implement a capital class cyno, you would have to justify it in game with something. While they can of course make up any reasons they want, it's still just a beacon you turn on so jump drives and portal generator to lock on.



    Just like the old damage control wasn't a meaningful fitting choice, neither is a cyno on a capital.

  • Limit CYNO capability to specific ships! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Half the point of a good cyno ship is that they don't look like a good cyno ship. Cynos would lose value if you could always see them coming. Considering how broken local is, cynos are the only counter balance.

    Limiting what ships can use it is a bad idea. However, the more serious question is, should it be harder to fit on some ships? They aren't really a fitting choice on capitals because the fitting requirements are so low for what it gives you. Everything in EvE should be a choice. Capital ships have capital everything else now, why not capital cynos?

  • AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Linus Gorp wrote:
    Give them the means to decloak cloaked ships and give us the means to un-tether tethered ships and forcefully undock them from stations and citadels.


    What? If you give people the means to decloak things, the counter-balance is making the cloak meaningful in the first place - I.E. actually hiding the ship, including from local.

    The cloak is a purely defensive module currently, as it hides nothing. Hunting would be many times more engaging if the cloak actually hid you, but in turn was subject to counter-play. Local removes the entire idea of a cloaked ship.

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

    It's a great time to be a new player if you join a major sov-bloc.The current sov system essentially turns new players into resources for the sov-blocs - the blocs need miners and ratters, and new players need easy access to resources and a good deal of guidance - it works out to being slightly mutually beneficial in the end probably.

    It's a horrible time to join as a new player if you do not want to play sov-online. There really aren't that many growing entities or even the potential to grow as a non-sov entity right now. Low and NPC nullsec are basically ignored, and those are the places that effectively function as 'nurseries' for new groups of players looking to play the game as a non-sov entity. Generally I feel most gaming groups these days are smaller (on the order of 10-15), and these groups are basically forced by existing mechanics to either adopt a sov-alliance, or resign themselves to an area of space which isn't really curated or looked after.

    They have done a great job on updating Sov-Online. It should, however, be possible to join and play your EvE Online.

  • More restrictions to the criminals. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Vokan NarkarIts wrote:
    basically a zero risk activity.


    Nonsense. They risk not finding targets. If you get ganked in HiSec, you are willfully negligent - 99.99% of losses in hisec are preventable with even a casual interest in one's own safety. Players could collectively make ganking a zero reward activity with a modest amount of effort, but choose not to. The way you beat the gankers is by not being ganked and wasting their time.

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    STV thus ensures that very few votes are wasted...


    Correct, it almost never wastes the overflow from the goon #1 ballot, instead giving it to the #2 goon ballot.

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Querns wrote:
    STV makes this entire post meaningless.



    Yeah, STV isn't breakable by sheer numerical force. That's why the CSM isn't always 70%+ big null blocs.

    Oh wait....

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:

    Nobody can represent the idiots who can't even be bothered to vote.


    Correct. This is not about people who do not vote. This is about people who vote and have a a playstyle that does not lend itself to the numbers game - see the long tail of first choices. Their groups and play styles do not have the organizational largess to effectively force the election of a candidate, yet the players themselves are, at least in my appraisal, part of the larger eve community, and if the CSM is to report the stated goal of representing the eve community, they should not be so systematically shut out of the process. They are.

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Querns wrote:
    Vic Jefferson wrote:
    When the community at large is composed of many smaller groups

    Have you considered that this isn't true?


    So, at least from the initial votes, there's a fairly huge tail of candidates that all get some votes, and a small group which gets a significantly larger share. The spread of the initial votes shows that these smaller communities exist, and that they do have representatives, and that together they represent a good deal of the community, simply that they aren't unified enough to vote as one homogeneous entity, because they aren't - that's not the EvE they play. Does that mean they aren't part of the community?

    Certainly when 'pubbies' aren't thought of part of the community, well, that pretty much speaks for itself.

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Retar Aveymone wrote:
    Vic Jefferson wrote:
    Aryth probably got the highest number of votes. What does it say about the voting system when the top player representative calls most of the voters 'pubbies' and terrible ones at that? Clearly Aryth can afford to be completely realistic and cynical and the same time. I mean that's some bravado, but at the same time that should hint at how broken the system really is.

    it says that the system works, because it allows groups to elect representatives without needing broad approval, so similarly highsec pubbies can elect someone without needing to kiss the ring of the mighty goonswarm empire. you've just proven the complete opposite of the point you claim to be making. you did, of course, prove what your actual complaint is: you are very mad that better-respected people got elected and you didn't

    also are you ever going to explain what you think your idiot graph in the first post means


    Why do people play in HiSec? LowSec? NPC Null?

    There are many reasons why. For some, a large alliance, for which Sov-null is tailored to support, is not where they find the most fun and enjoyment in the game. They would rather play in a smaller, more personal setting that has smaller social structures. There are many flavors of this, across the spectrum of security status. The mistake you are making is that you are treating HiSec like one huge monolithic entity, which is a silly assumption, whereas, considering the scope and size of the Imperium, it is not as much of a stretch to say sov-null is largely defined by the Imperium. Sov-Null builds large monolithic blocs, other areas, not so much. It's not high vs null here, it's about the size of the social structures they produce, and only the largest social structures tend to win voices. This is counter to the stated aims of the CSM - to voice for the community, not a subset of a few communities.

    Retar Aveymone wrote:

    i hope this has been edifying and that next time you try to run in an election you will take the thirty seconds to look up how the election even works


    I understand how it works. If you really want to dissect the votes even more, funny things happen as you can reconstruct parts of the goon ballot based on how votes trickle down after the top candidate has taken a seat. The visuals and the Gini index both are there simply to show how strongly certain blocs can vote, and how uneven the votes are. I am fully aware of how the system works, but initial vote does act as an indicator of bloc clout. Sov-null clearly can polarize around one chosen candidate easier than other areas.

    The stated goal of the CSM is to voice for the community. When the community at large is composed of many smaller groups, and a few very large groups, the current system does a very good job of depriving all the smaller groups of a voice, thus failing to accomplish the original goals - voice the community. I am not faulting the SVT system for being SVT, that's fine, I am saying SVT may not be the best choice here, as clearly the end result of each election is very skewed representation.

  • The CSM – Council of Sov. Management. in EVE Communication Center

    Zanar Skwigelf wrote:
    ]Taking it back to EVE, do people honestly expect a CSM full of representatives for the non-voters would be as useful to the player base compared to what we have now? I don't like a CSM full of "null-sec wanna be devs", but I'd rather the pro-active, highly engaged people get their candidates instead of people that aren't aware CSM is even a thing.


    Still comes down to playstyles that innately revolve around organizing mass numbers disenfranchising playstyles that do not. It's not really a question of non-voters vs voters, many people do vote for the candidates they think will best represent them, but due to the size of those niches, or the lack of centralization in those niches, the candidates have less chance of actually getting elected, as the vote for that niche ends up spread. Considering the CFC (Imperium) is more than twice the size by player number of the next biggest null bloc, it should come as no surprise they can stack the panel, versus what is probably a very flat distribution of lots of mom and pop, smaller corps which may vote for their 'local' candidate, thus ensuring their defeat.

    There are many very passionate, and very knowledgeable individuals that ran this year, last year, and the year before it.

    For example, compare

    'Aryth' wrote:

    I am not going to do any of those things because I don't need your votes you terrible pubbies.


    to...well any of the other CSM candidates that spent a lot of time showing you how passionate they were about their respective niche of the game. Aryth probably got the highest number of votes. What does it say about the voting system when the top player representative calls most of the voters 'pubbies' and terrible ones at that? Clearly Aryth can afford to be completely realistic and cynical and the same time. I mean that's some bravado, but at the same time that should hint at how broken the system really is.

    I think people are fundamentally missing the point. I'm not trying to contest the democratic process, or that bigger numbers shouldn't beat smaller numbers. If the CSM is supposed to be a tool to represent players of this game, it has completely failed for one, and the only way to get actual player representation is to be more proactive about how the system works.

    'CSM Information Page' wrote:

    The role of a CSM member is to represent the player community in the development of EVE Online.


    Clearly the rest of us 'Terrible Pubbies' aren't part of the wider player community.

  • Give high sec gankers what we've always wanted.... More Risk! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    GoodGreyer Ayderan wrote:
    That's right. Fake... Cargo....



    It has been quite a while, but if you really wanted to troll the gankers, here's how you do it.
    You get about 30-40 people to use relatively new alts, and contract each other empty boxes such that you cannot scan down more than 1 layer. Put all these boxes in t1 industrial ships and set a huge autopilot loop up and down the major routes, and even to some side routes. 150 long auto pilot loops, etc. These decoys should cost no more than like 1m isk or so. When the gankers scan them, they will want to take a risk (what's in that contract box!?), but they will start getting frustrated when it's either nothing or a joke item every time.

    The key to this trick is saturation and frequency. HiSec bears are notorious for not being herded easily, but if you did get enough people to willingly toss enough decoys into the waters to suitably give the gankers a headache, you may succeed without needing a new mechanic - the mechanics are there, you don't need anything new, but you do need the organization. Players should be responsible for their own emergent gameplay, not heavy hands of the developers.

    It would take a while, it would take lots of people, but if enough tornado/vexor ganks stopped paying, and the field became too unprofitable due to how may bad targets there were, you might make an impact.

Forum Signature

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?