EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-12-07 08:26
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-06 18:02
  • Number of Posts: 4,487
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Zhilia Mann

Security Status 0.0
  • Tide Way Out Productions Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • CCP what have you done to plexes! in EVE Gameplay Center

    If the overseers didn't drop OPEs that's a bug and should be reported. If the overseers only dropped OPEs and meta modules that's bad luck and the sample size question begins to really matter.

  • market order workflow and fair market prices in EVE Technology and Research Center

    WTS 100,000,00 units fair trade veldspar at 2500 isk/unit. Ethically sourced from indigenous miners to help them set up pocket industries making frigates. Guaranteed zero carbon footprint. No artificial chemicals used during processing; we use a traditional Minmatar refining technique involving Fedo scat and natural fibers to filter impurities. No asteroids are harmed during the collection process.

  • Blueprint Modification in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ajem Hinken wrote:

    So how the hell do you do Invention? It's a station service, it seems, but I can't find it on any stations...


    What? Any station with research will work.

  • Blueprint Modification in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ajem Hinken wrote:
    Amojin wrote:
    So long as T2 BPO's exist. and AFAIK, there are a bunch of these still held in rich people's hands, depite what we rabble go through, improvement of copies is not something I would balk at, at all, in increasing time or material efficiency, or even in being able to modify the number of runs.

    Since T2 BPO's were not annihilated, OP, I'd be willing to stand behind any reasonable proposal, at all, since having a 'grandfathered' BPO of a T2 anything is certainly not how CCP handles anything else. When ships are nerfed, they are not grandfathered in based on date of creation...

    I didn't even think T2 or above BPO's existed... and that they were unfindable anywhere. How might one attain one of these, if said one were too stupid to do Invention?


    Places like this. No new ones have been created since this. The total number of T2 BPOs is pretty much insignificant compared to the volume of trade.

  • Restrict players to ships of their faction (an end to meta-gaming) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Amojin wrote:
    Dark Lord Trump wrote:
    You want more ships, you pay more money. There has to be a reason to subscribe.


    Very good. So, now we are where I wanted us to be.

    This is a Pay to Win game. Now, that being established, when you win?

    How does it make you feel? Does it feel cheap, dishonest, or are you actually feeling accomplished?


    No, it really isn't. It is now, and always has been, a pay to play game. It just happens to have an option for restricted free play now.

    It's also quite impossible to win. Or lose, really. So what has this to do with **** all anything else in the thread?

  • Restrict players to ships of their faction (an end to meta-gaming) in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    it has nothing to do with fair or unfair all this would do gameplay wise is force meta gaming as players simply rolled toons it what was the strongest faction for a role. thats it. so rather than having everyone be an individual we may as well just have preset characters, you know something that goes against an open ended sandbox


    This. Right here. Restrict pilots to racial ships and you're actually created a need for more accounts. As is, one of the appeals is that you do get to be flexible and train into whatever you want without spending any more -- you just have to wait.

    Racial restrictions won't reduce metagaming (how the hell was that supposed to work anyway?) or help with balance -- it will just force players to invest differently.

  • Exploration Feedback - Known Space Data Sites in EVE Communication Center

    Krysalys Terminus wrote:
    Re Combat sites: In any given system, the harder Combat sites will give you more Isk than the easier sites. Damn this confusion about escalations, or HS vs LS vs Null.

    All of that crap is irrelevant to the point stated:

    Activity A (Relic Sites) are worth more for your time than Activity B (Data Sites), and it is a waste of time to do Activity B when you could be doing Activity A instead; RESULTING IN everyone else who comes along being screwed by you because you managed to get to Activity A before all of them.

    Trying to confuse everyone with nonsensical bull sh!t only makes you look dense.

    All I am trying to ask is for the two possible activities while doing Exploration Sites to be equally worth your time as a player, so that you can always know that the sites you are spending your time scanning down are not someone else's dredges.


    Do you have any arguments that don't include random ad hominem inclusions?

    Look, when I run exploration I'm looking for a handful of sites: ghost sites, superior sleeper caches, 5/10s, 6/10s, annexes, and distribution facilities (I'm often in a ladar region). Those are, for me, the most profitable sites to run given my overall setup.

    However, they are far from equal. I would much rather get a 6/10 than a 5/10 (at least in the regions I'm in most often). But that doesn't mean I don't run the damn 5/10 even if I might be missing out of a 6/10.

    Why, and how is any of this relevant?

    Game theory works here, I suppose. I'm basically faced with a choice between a known payout for a known cost and the chance for an unknown payout that might and might not appear. Yes, the unknown payout is better, but I have no guarantee of getting it. I've decided, again based on my own circumstances and ability, that the 5/10 is an acceptable payout against the risk of not getting anything. Would I run 6/10s all day if they were available? Of course! Am I willing to risk passing on getting one for the right price? Sure!

    Relevance? You're doing the same thing with data versus relic. You've decided that for you, under your circumstances, the payout of data sites is not high enough to risk missing a relic. And that's your call. I'm not here to tell you you're wrong. However, your personal judgement about relative worth and availability doesn't point towards a structural problem any more than my preference for 6/10s means that 5/10s are **** and need to be boosted and/or more 6/10s should spawn.

    You've utterly failed to justify the existence of an actual problem here.

    Try this. Next time you're out, hit all the data sites. Cherry pick them; I don't care. Spend a few hours on it. Then another time, spend the same amount of time but run everything. Repeat. Make a spreadsheet. For completeness, do a run for the same controlled amount of time doing only relics and hunting hard for them, skipping all else. Track it all. If there's a real problem, it will show up in the data.

    Until then, you're pissing at the wind and claiming to be right based on a sense of entitlement and nothing more.

  • Dole out fitted t1 frigs in faction warfare in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Spend a year playing industry. If you still think this is a good idea then we can have a conversation. Until then, buy your damn ships and stop being an entitled brat.

  • Fit and expectations for Dominix and level 4 in EVE Gameplay Center

    DLAs and omnis don't really add anything if you're not using sentry drones. Neither does the MJD. Now, all of those things go in to most general L4 Dominix fits, which do generally range tank with sentries.

    Now, if you were to do a brawling Domi for L4s? Maybe something like this:

    [Dominix, L4 brawler]

    Large Armor Repairer II
    Armor Thermal Hardener II
    Armor Kinetic Hardener II
    Damage Control II
    Drone Damage Amplifier II
    Drone Damage Amplifier II
    Drone Damage Amplifier II

    100MN Afterburner II
    Drone Navigation Computer II
    Drone Navigation Computer II
    Large Micro Jump Drive
    Omnidirectional Tracking Link II, Tracking Speed Script

    Heavy Energy Nosferatu II
    Heavy Energy Nosferatu II
    Large Remote Armor Repairer II
    [Empty High slot]
    [Empty High slot]
    [Empty High slot]

    Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
    Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
    Large Capacitor Control Circuit I


    Ogre II x5

    Obviously that's a T2 fit so downgrade wherever. Logic is this:

    1) your highs are kind of wasted on a mission Dominix. If you wanted to put guns up there, a Navy Dominix would be far, far superior. So... maybe try to use the highs for cap? The LRAR is there to help a drone here and there and help maintain agro.

    2) Mids are as you'd expect, but I kept the LMJD. Why? Because rats don't scram and I highly suspect you're going to hit an oh **** moment when you need to get out. LMJDs will clear webs and rat tackle and should reduce damage enough for you to get away with your hull intact. If for whatever reason you don't feel you need that, I'd swap for a cap booster in a heartbeat. DNCs are there to speed up your drones (obviously). Scripted omni is to help your heavies actually hit smaller things.

    3) Lows are tank. Honestly, a fifth slot on tank isn't a bad idea; EANM or reactive hardener would do fine. Damage mods are damage mods. I'm a little concerned with the meta armor rep you listed; since you'll be up close and personal you'll be taking lots of damage and might want to at least consider splurging on a better repper.

    4) Rigs? Well, if you dropped the LMJD for a cap booster I'd swap to armor rigs. But as is you'll want the cap. Even with the CCCs and both nos on you can't sustain the LRAR but at least you can keep your local running indefinitely.

    But yeah: train into sentries. Dominix is a much better range tank sentry ship than it is mission brawler.

  • PI - launchpad is not seen by POCO? in EVE Gameplay Center

    No real idea but it sounds like a classic "clear your cache" moment.

  • Building Orca & Freighters in ECs in EVE Gameplay Center

    I've done both. JFs are fine too.

  • Fleet Staging point in EVE Gameplay Center

    PavlikX wrote:
    Well, first of all i see nothing bad in increasing numbers of "blue" modules.


    Shrug. I like to keep prices up. For me, I'd rather see a high payout from my exploration site (which results from scarcity) rather than everyone and their brother able to afford A and X type everything.

    I see both sides, but I know where I come down.

  • Thoughts and opinions on the next ship type to skill into.... in EVE Gameplay Center

    T3Cs are pretty nice for high sec exploration if you ever want to try that.

    Burner stuff... sure. I guess if you're doing L4s that's a solid option.

    The most versatile thing on your list though? BRs. They're just insanely handy to have around. They warp fast, cloak, align quickly, carry as much as you need for most purposes.... Love them. DSTs are ok too.

  • Citadels And Egineering Complexes in EVE Communication Center

    Guillard Chastot wrote:
    Different but related question, what is the initial investment to set up a raitaru in hisec, and what can be expected for monthly upkeep for reprocessing, docking, fitting, and even market?

    I do have a location in mind, but it would be a bit before I could delve into it.


    Can't put a market on a Raitaru. You'd need an Azbel for that.

    Initial cost is 620mil, give or take, for a bare Raitaru plus about 180mil for each of three service modules if you want to copy, invent, and produce. ME/TE is included with copy. If you additionally want to reprocess you'll need at least two Raitarus or a Raitaru and an Astrahus. Other modules are comparatively cheap (10-60mil each).

    Docking and fitting is included.

    The real cost is in rigs. T1 rigs are going to run you ~500mil a piece. T2 rigs are over a billion each (plan about 1.3bil). They're also highly limited in scope, so plan accordingly.

    Ongoing cost for a Raitaru depends on services running, but a typical copy/invent/produce setup would run you 27 blocks/hour so roughly 13mil/day or 400mil/month.

  • Fleet Staging point in EVE Gameplay Center

    Let's talk DED sites more generally because they fall into two different categories and it seems people overlook that these days.

    First, let's clarify that we're not talking about unrated sites. Those are different. They have no guaranteed drop; all DED sites drop at least one OPE and unrated sites don't.. This category includes things like annexes, vigils, bases, etc. They escalate and have a chance at deadspace loot if they escalate all the way. Each escalation gets a role and yes, the travel can be rather long.

    We're also not talking about anomalies. Anoms can of course escalate TO a DED site but are not themselves relevant here. We're talking only about sites that require probes.

    Second, let's talk about "normal" DED sites. This includes every rated site except 9/10s, Angel 6/10, and Serpentis 6/10. These get threat ratings on warp in and don't include an escalation. They also lack tackle, which can be a great boon if you don't know what you're doing. Oh, and they're deadspace so gates will protect you from anyone coming in.

    Finally, we have the pseudo-DED sites. They're just a bit odd. First, they definitely drop OPEs: 22nd for Fleet Staging Points and 19th for the Serpentis and Angel 6/10 replacements. This is in line with categorizing them along with rated sites. They also drop the appropriate modules (battleship and cruiser A-types respectively). However, they include guaranteed escalations (which, yes, can sometimes take you a distance). The first site in each chain is gated but the rest aren't. Well, they do include gates, but you'll see combat before you can take one. They also, you might have guessed, include NPC tackle, making them significantly more risky than normal DED sites.

    Oh, they're also harder than they really ought to be based on rating progression. Serpentis is the most out of whack, with difficulty going something like 6 > 9 > 8 > 7 > 10 > 5, but in general 9/10s are considered harder than 10/10s.

    So there's quite a bit required to bring things totally in line. One option, probably the easiest, would be to shorten the escalation distance, but that doesn't really address many of the inconsistencies. Another route might be to revamp the pseudo-DEDs entirely, though honestly I can't think of a reason to remove the sites we have per se. I suppose new and old could coexist.

    My preferred option? Glad you asked, straw man!

    What I'd really like to see happen is the following.


    1. Introduce replacements for existing pseudo-DED sites that are basically in line with the difficulty of other DED sites. Move current pseudo-DED loot tables to these sites.
    2. Introduce pseudo-DED sites at least from 6/10 - 9/10, but preferably to include all ratings. Make them hard. Make them escalate. Use existing pseudo-DED sites as a difficulty guide. Keep OPEs to distinguish them as DED sites.
    3. Introduce new deadspace modules for the loot table. Not everything has a blue version. Some of it would be useless (would anyone ever pay for a Pithum C-type shield recharger? No. Don't care.) Some of it would be glorious (armor tanked Widow with a full rack of X-type ECMs? Absolutely.)


    Net effect? More sites for explorers. Supply on current modules doesn't change much (though maybe you'd get more Corelum A-types on market). New modules are somewhat harder to get, ensuring some modicum of scarcity in the short term.

    Balance nightmare? Eh, sure. Worth it in my eyes? Yes.

  • Carriers in EVE Gameplay Center

    ShahFluffers wrote:

    - There is a mod called the (aw crap... I can't remember the name of it) that drastically increases your targeting speed and boosts fighter damage slightly.... but blocks Remote Reps and prevents you from using any form of Electronic Warfare.



    Networked sensor array.

    Also note that carriers can use fighter-only high slot rate of fire modules called fighter support units.

  • Citadel defence and the Alpha clone in EVE Gameplay Center

    Frostys Virpio wrote:
    7- MY guess is OP's group took a large contract they now realize will not be as easy to fulfill as they though hence the call to nerf citadels with this post and the other one about being able to shoot it outside of the vulnerability window.


    If you slog through the post history it actually seems slightly more audacious than that: OP specifically invited high sec structure grind contracts without checking what was involved and now wants to change the rules.

  • Citadel and EC direction pointing. in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
    i would however like if it was easier to point WHEN SETTING UP


    So very much this.

  • Faction explorations ships in EVE Gameplay Center

    From what I recall, the ships were converted to skins.

    I know I have all four skins sitting around anyhow, and I think that's how I got them.

  • PI items in clone state alpha in EVE Gameplay Center

    Pretty sure you can. Do you have a launchpad built?