EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2012-05-05 08:22
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-07-01 05:35
  • Number of Posts: 725
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Winter Archipelago

Security Status 3.4
  • Autumn Industrial Enterprises Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Upwell structures should consume "base" amounts of fuel or ISK in Council of Stellar Management

    Kenneth Feld wrote:

    Citadel didn't replace POS, it replaced POS AND Outpost

    Outpost never required fuel


    Have you thought about the greater implications of fuel demand to keep these citadels running?

    Outposts were also limited to one per system. Have you thought about the greater implications of allowing dozens and hundreds of Upwell structures per system without any way of reducing the god-awful method of removing them? Or, perhaps, having to have your meatshields pay to have a lot of structures around trade hubs and drawing in billions of ISK would be a bit too much for you.

  • A change to Skill Injectors to fix the FOTM / high-SP injecting. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Let's face it: the ability to instantly inject a new char into a high-income ship or any other FOTM activity is likely one of the big reasons why carrier / supercarrrier ratting and other forms of high-income activities (including Rorqual mining) have exploded into the nerfs we're seeing today.

    To counter this, I'd like to suggest that Skill Injectors change from being an instant injection of SP and instead provide their SP at a rate of 1 SP per second over time. These would still provide the 1 SP / sec on characters not training but with skills in their queue, and in an event where there's no skill in the queue, the injector's SP injection is paused.

    A person keeping a character injected 24 / 7 would still provide a little over 31.5 mil additional SP per year, but it would take a more reasonable amount of time in order to bring a character up to the high-SP levels that can be immediately injected into now.

    These would be separate from Accelerators, which would only affect the normal SP gain from regular training. Additionally, Accelerators would have no influence on the rate of injection from Skill Injectors.

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

    I have no skin in this game as I'm not a carrier ratter, but it does seem like these are some pretty heavy-handed hits. Maybe instead have smaller reductions in damage, but further increase the rate at which fighters are targeted by rats, while also reducing the time between issuing commands.

    Also, since there's concern about ISK faucets, Incursions remain a pretty significant source of ISK when compared to the number of people who run them and the relative degree of safety. Why not move 10% or so of the ISK payouts from Incursions into LP?

  • Advanced Audio Settings Changes in EVE Information Center

    I've been messing around with different sound settings on some different alts today, and things are just too simple now. I would personally prefer to see a few things separated into slightly different categories.

    Crimewatch, Locking > These can both be pretty useful and important, but they're mixed in with things that tend to be mere noise (UI Clicks, Radial Menu). I would love to seem them separated from the UI Clicks and Radial Menu into their own setting.

    DScan ping > Just... just please, throw it out. I'm a wormholer. I use DScan multiple times each minute while active in space, and every few seconds while hunting. It's easily one of the more annoying sounds I've encountered in a game. Since I suppose it won't be discarded entirely, it would be a good sound to put in with the UI Clicks and Radial Menu.

    Hacking > Not essential sounds, but they aren't annoying (at least to me). They add a nice bit of additional sound when hacking that isn't intrusive. I don't know where it would fit in, but I would be happy to see it divorced from the DScan ping.

    Warping Effect > This can be extremely useful, but it's mixed in with explosions, which can be rather loud already, and are more fluff than the warping effects are. I would suggest moving the explosions to Ship Ambience.

    I might have some more thoughts as I play around with the sounds more, but this is what I've noticed from playing around today.

  • "PLEX can no longer be used for Character transfer fee payments" in EVE Communication Center

    forums wrote:

    The PLEX was already paid for by someone who sold it for ISK

    this is a new sale

    PLEX could change hands in game a million times and CCP doesn't make any money, they don't make any money when it's used either , they just make money when they sell things , like PLEX or Character Transfers for cash

    PLEX appear on the income reports CCP have put out as deferred revenue. So while $20 in (a reduced number of) new sales is a big deal, transferring $40 from deferred revenue into realized revenue is no small thing, either.

  • "PLEX can no longer be used for Character transfer fee payments" in EVE Communication Center

    Father Manlove wrote:

    The most pathetically hilarious part? When PayPal for transfers was taken away, they said they'd look into getting it re-added in the future, pretty much the same crap they've said here. It's been what now, 5 years?

    Just a few months shy of 5 years, yup.

    PayPal payments for character transfers temporarily disabled posted on 2012-07-26

  • "PLEX can no longer be used for Character transfer fee payments" in EVE Communication Center

    JuckFames 315 wrote:

    Considering your character's name, I can't help but see you as a troll trying to goad people into arguing with you over something you already know.

  • "PLEX can no longer be used for Character transfer fee payments" in EVE Communication Center

    CCP Falcon wrote:
    This is something that wasn't included in the release with the PLEX changes, as it's caused by a technical limitation with the way the new PLEX system works.

    The plan is to look at this down the future and potentially reintroduce paying for this with PLEX, but at this stage we're not committed to a timeline on when this will happen.

    Hope this answers your question Smile

    I've held off on replying until now because I didn't think I would be able to remain civil enough, but I believe I can do so now.

    Honestly, this feels like another of the half-baked changes that get put out, with a promise of fixing it at some undetermined point in the future, but with said point being (frequently) literal years away.

    Losing the ability to pay for character transfers with PLEX is a significant change. It may only affect a small subset of the EVE population, but for that subset, this is basically a "game-ending" change. I'm not trying to imply that I expect people to quit over this, but rather than it basically removes that form of gameplay from the game.

    It is, admittedly, just a small subset of the population who use it, but over the last few years, it seems that these are the changes we've been receiving: small changes that have severe negative impacts on small subsets of the population, frequently ending or nearly ending that particular style of play. Each individual change may only affect a small number of people on its own, but collectively, these changes are adding up, and a larger portion of the playerbase is being affected.

    I may not be an active user of the Character Bazaar, only ever using the transfer system to move characters around on my own accounts (which are pretty much how I want them now), but I'm looking at this in light of Martin Niemoller's "First they came for..." poem, and I'll add my voice to any call to reimplement this feature.

    I'm going to urge you, CCP, to please make it a priority to get this functionality back into the game as soon as possible. It may only affect a small subset of players, but each time a change comes through that removes a small part of the game, the subset of players affected grows.

  • "PLEX can no longer be used for Character transfer fee payments" in EVE Communication Center

    From the patchnotes for 2017-05-09: https://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-119.5-release/

    Is this going to be a temporary thing, CCP, or will this be permanent? This is no small game-changer for people using the Character Bazaar.

  • Trilambda Feature Feedback - Suns, Hangars and Logos! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Were there any bookmark changes or resets when the warp-in on suns was changed? One of my alts has over 100 sunbounce bookmarks from the various places I've been (especially wormholes), and I'd probably cry if all of those were reset to the new warp-in...

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

    Considering that we're limited to 1k stacks per container / cargo system (including cargo holds), and corpses take up only 2m3 each, I'd like to suggest a new type of container: a Meat Locker or Cryopreservation Storage Container or some similar such name.

    This container would be 2k m3 inside and out, but the only thing that could go inside of it are corpses. Additionally, the corpse bays of these ships would be able to accept these new containers.

    That way, a person flying one of these ships could have an actual chance of filling their corpse hole with corpses, instead of sticking 1k corpses in them and having tens of thousands of m3 still sitting empty.

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

    Is the mass on the Dagon a typo? It's a third lower than the mass of the existing FAXes. Clocking in under a bil also makes it able to use a number of holes that other capitals can't, won't it?

    Edit ::

    CCP Larrikin wrote:

    Q)Is the mass on the Dagon a typo? It's a third lower than the mass of the existing FAXes.
    A) Yes, it was. A Copy / Paste error infact. Its been fixed now :)

    Thank Bob. That would have been an oppressive beast to deal with in wormholes at 800 mil.

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    This was mentioned over on Reddit (original comment here), but it's a good idea and I thought it was worth reposting in the official thread:

    tcwillis79 wrote:
    Suggestion: Make it so that you can only detonate the moon rock during your vulnerability timer. This will cut down on the time zone tanking because people will need to set the vulnerability window when they can field a fleet.

  • Dev blog: Introducing Upwell Refineries in EVE Information Center

    This is a bit of a wild idea, but it's a thought that would throw a bone to lowsec.

    What if the quality of these moon belts were inversely proportional to the security status of the system compared to what we have now (where the lower the truesec, the better the asteroid belts, rats, moons, etc)? Higher truesec would have better moon belts, meaning that lowsec would be the go-to for harvesting moon minerals.

    Nullsec moons would still provide these moon belts, but the size and quality of the rocks would be reduced as you get deeper into the truesec (meaning the best nullsec areas would generally be the ones nearest the borders, which are also the ones most likely to be easily targeted).

    This would also make nullsec sov with poor truesec a better place to call home, in addition to throwing a bone to lowsec.

    A lore-related bit behind this is that a part of the reason that highsec is highsec is because that's where the best resources / minerals are at (with the empires holding exclusive rights on the "good" ore there, and our scanners being prevented from even seeing it in the belts), and it's where the empires are most willing to defend (beyond simply having a manpower-related reason). From 0.5 through 1.0, the resources are good enough that the empires are willing to put forth a significant amount of effort to defend them. 0.1 through 0.4 are still empire, but aren't good enough for the empires to put effort into their own mining operations, thus opening it to Capsuleers.

    Outside of wormholes (which can't do moon mining), nullsec already has the best asteroid belts, anoms, rats, gas, etc. Inverting the usual truesec impact on moon minerals might be something interesting.

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

    Coelomate Tian wrote:
    Winter Archipelago wrote:
    "Before" Image: Bright Spod.

    "After" Image: Regular Spod.

    Are the Bright Spod asteroids not significantly smaller than regular Spod asteroids already? This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.

    I don't think this impacts testing, so long as you look at ore amount instead of estimated isk.

    Whether the ores are regular/+ 5%/+10% is determined by the security status of the system. At certain security breakpoints, all of the ore switches to one variety, but I think it LOOKS the same. AFAIK from my casual observation, the size of the rocks is otherwise identical. The ore itself has identical volume too. I could be wrong, as I haven't extensively tested it, but I have no reason to be concerned from jump.

    It's hard to find anoms on the test server, so it's not surprising that people testing on sisi can't always match the "flavor" of ore they use on tranquility.

    I'm not looking at the estimated ISK, but at the actual quantities of mined ore. The size of the asteroids themselves is different, and if a person goes after a Bright Spod rock in one place that's small and the Spodzilla on the test server, it's going to make a huge difference in yield.

    I don't have a Rorqual of my own to test it with on my own, unfortunately, but without having seen the actual tests conducted by my own eyes, I'm extremely skeptical as to the true use of this test.

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

    "Before" Image: Bright Spod.

    "After" Image: Regular Spod.

    Are the Bright Spod asteroids not significantly smaller than regular Spod asteroids already? This isn't an apples-to-apples comparison.

  • [March] Character's Total Net Worth estimation in EVE Technology and Research Center

    It's too bad that there's no easy way to determine the value of researched BPOs or BPCs. Probably half my net value is in the research value of my BPO library, while the NPC value is rather meager.

  • What type of data is cleared when clearing the cache? in EVE Communication Center

    Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
    if you just want to get rid of autofill entries just right click in the box and clear history

    the cache has pretty much all your settings, window locations, market quick bar, overview settings. can be pretty annoying to reset, probably want to back it up before you do it unless something is broken.

    This was the type of info I was looking for, thank you!

  • What type of data is cleared when clearing the cache? in EVE Communication Center

    This isn't so much a "new player" question, but I figured I'd get a better answer here than in GD.

    Anyway, over the years, I've built up a rather bothersome number of unnecessary extra auto-fill entries due to one-off contracts, mis-typed item names, mis-typed location names, mis-typed text in general, and I've been thinking about clearing the cache to clear those out. However, I'm concerned about what all would be cleared.

    Other than text entries, what else is cleared when using the Clear All Cache Files button? Is there anything important that goes along with that?

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

    I would have liked to have seen shorter timers (24 hours for T1, 72 for T2, and 168 for Syndicate), but I can understand the desire to start small and work from there.

    However, what boggles my mind is the increase in EHP for T2 bubbles. Killing them is enough of a pain as it is. Reduce T1 bubble EHP by 25%, leave T2 EHP where it's at, and give Syndicate the 50% increase, instead.

Forum Signature