You poor bastard.
What?
1 Like
I just hope the game survives the inevitable player exodus during these times. As I said, I’ve spent 8 years here, and paid a lot of $ over the years on my toons, so the last thing I want is for EVE to die. And to that end, I hope CCP actually has further plans, rather than a “let’s see what happens if we do this now” approach.
1 Like
It’s as if I joined this game at the exact right moment: you’re giving the established/stagnant and the cheating a massive kick in the behind.
That means it’ll only get better for starting and normal (or actual) players.
I’ve mined conduits before. With the long ranges between rocks, it’s a pain in the arse, but doable. However for building large ships, it will be a considerable effort.
I may be wrong, but I’ve noticed that the spawn times for conduits have been significantly increased in the last few weeks, so depends on whether there is enough for everyone.
I will take all your mining gear at 0.01 ISK against Jita buy. Delivered in Jita. If you are going to complain this much you can make the effort to drop it off where it is easy for me to get.
I know a lot of folks are pissy about this, but I want to at least acknowledge that this is the first real discussion from the ecosystem team about their long-term vision and goals. That’s a good thing - we needed this a while back and didn’t get it, but I’m glad that it’s finally out there.
One of the things that I think CCP needs to remember is that not only do they need to explain what they’re doing and why they’re doing it, they need to convince the players that what they’re doing is going to solve the problem they’ve identified.
We all recognize that the current state of the economy is unsustainable. The choice to focus on the supply side before the demand side is an interesting one - I’m not sure I agree with it - but at least it seems clear to me here that they are going to make demand side changes at some point and that’s a good thing.
For the folks who are claiming this is an empty post - read it again. This is one of the clearest, straightforward explanations of what CCP is doing with the economy they’ve put out in a while. Feel free to disagree with it - there are things in here I’m concerned about - but at least be fair enough to give them credit for putting this on paper.
9 Likes
I’ve been here longer, but this is the best hope I’ve seen in yrs. Sad to say.
There’s plenty of conduits for everyone. They spawn every 20 minutes and it takes hours to mine one out. You can have multiple conduits per system. Once you pop one and start mining it, another one will pop up in 20 minutes in that same system. Then another player can go pop that one and start mining it, and so on and so forth. Hell, you could have players mining 20 conduits in the same system.
Right now, it’s not a matter of ‘feel’. It’s a matter of cold, clear-eyed analysis.
Item 1: In order to hold space, you need a supercapital fleet that will not be easily defeated.
Item 2: In order to ensure your supercapital fleet is not easily defeated, that fleet must be roughly on-parity with the fleet your enemy can bring.
Item 3: In the current political environment, there are 3 major blocs: The Imperium, Legacy, and PanFam/PandaFam. Legacy can be reasonably sure NCdot (PanFam) and the Imperium will never ally. Neither PanFam nor the Imperium can ever be sure Legacy will not side with their enemy, as Legacy has sided with both in the past.
This means that:
In order for PanFam to be sure of holding their space, they need to reach parity with the combined supercapital forces of the Imperium and Legacy.
In order for the Imperium to be sure of holding our space, we need to reach parity with the combined supercapital forces of PanFam and Legacy.
In order for Legacy to be sure of holding their space, they need to reach parity with either of those groups.
Which means it is impossible to manage a long-term balance-of-power and rough supercapital parity. Instead—under the current system—all 3 major blocs need to keep churning out as many supercapitals as possible. To do otherwise would be to invite a massive assault. And without that ‘We can defeat both other groups together’ kind of power, you can’t afford to use your supers… because if you lose them… well, you’re back to Item 1, you have no space… and now you can’t build more supers to get back in the hunt.
If CCP can crack that nut… then good for them. The longer it takes them to do it, though, the more the only feasible solution becomes ‘delete supercapitals’.
4 Likes
There’s the map upside-down teardrop with a dot in the middle that says you’re in 1DQ 
Is there? How odd… I actually wasn’t in 1DQ for most of the day. I was scanning moons in a relaxed, stress-free manner. 
Yeah…but I feel like they’re starving a fat person (yeah, I’m gravitationally challenged) to the point of anorexia to fix the obesity.
Think of it as a gastric bypass.
1 Like
Which is what you need to do - think of this as a couple of months worth of gastric bypass.
No I am saying your argument is that line members don’t know better. But you think you are some how immune to this and know everything going on.
GET OUT OF MY HEAD
1 Like
I CAN’T HELP IT IF YOU NEED TO LOSE WEIGHT, BRISC.
(I mean, so do I, y’know?)
Yeah, good job. It’s nice to see the communication and hear what’s happening. It’s great to see stuff being done, but even greater that we get to hear that there’s a plan and what some of the outcomes have been.
1 Like
When I first started out in a pod capitals and sub-caps flew in the same space, yet capitals were restricted in what they could shoot at. I always wondered how that would change fleets if a ship of a given size could only shoot at one size below it, but any size above it. Perhaps limiting capitals from engaging in enosis mechanics would be a start ( fax enosis is just riddiculous, even with a 5x time penalty ) and reduce their necessity for territorial ambitions, though I think it needs to be more drastic, since the net effect of the super umbrella is protection of other sources of income, not just to pew pew.
I would have been giving some of those categories a D. Haw removal and boson changes are nice, but it doesn’t address the fact that stupid amounts of ISK have already been generated.
Either null security isk generation needs to come down, or high security isk generation is to go up. Doubt that the latter will be the outcome.
I think its wealth. Look at the big groups. Everytime they field a fleet that demolishes the enemy with little losses, not only do they destroy a lot of ISK, but they have a bigger advantage in the next fleet. Now that may well be how the mechanics currently work and could be understood as fair, though on a bigger scale they’re hurting the game long term because fleets don’t cost anything to maintain.
So true. Instead it requires active effort, not just turtling up behind the walls.
Eventually you’ll be going much further each day. 40 jumps for PvP might seem okay on a regular basis, but to baby sit a bunch of miners day in day out? Your members are going to get sick of that pretty quickly.
Moon mining in high security space should never have been a thing. AFK activity of any kind needs to go, not just ratting.
It would have been better if CCP exempted mining boosts from the on-grid changes, or limited the number of active industrial cores in a site.
Skill injector mechanics need work and CCP should rightfully be criticised for the heavy focus the game has on capital warfare.
I think there are those that believe their vast mining fleets will always have somewhere to pilfer, forgetting that nobody wants to jump their rorqual several times just to hoover up a pittance of ore.
Look how long war declarations took to be iterated. This game was supposed to be fun for some at the cost of others.
The stockpiles won’t be burned through unless the big fleets incur losses that require their consumption. The blue doughnut will ensure all the little folk get shafted before they start shafting each other.
This isn’t too bad an idea. The code is already there from triglavian invasions, just make mining lasers take longer to cycle rather than reduce the volume. Its all there still, just harder to get.
Lol. Big penalty to PvE for non-holders, slightly less for those in the alliance. Nice.
I almost choked on my cornflakes when I read the desire to remove “non-repetitive gameplay”. That covers a lot of the PvE content like mining.
Cause who wants to log into ‘Get blobbed online’.
Asset safety changes scare me. I have this deep dark foreboding fear that EVE will just become like Rust where everyone wakes up to find out their citadels got offline raided and the only you have left is a rock and a torch.
Rorquals that aren’t under an umbrella at least.
Agreed, more dynamism is better.
AFK gameplay?
No. Some space has inherent strategic advantage, like say having 150+ systems with in jump range of a single point.
They might if they have to actually maintain them.
!Ding
This exactly. When the alliance handed out ships from the moon goo people didn’t feel the need to go out into space and make ISK. When the passive moon goo disappeared, people had an incentive to go out and generate it in stupid quantities that far exceeded what they got from SRP.
It would at least make owning sov worth something again.
Because they can do it with shitty skills afk.
Give the peasants enough land that they don’t starve and try to rebel, but not too much more in case they get smart and have you killed.
3 Likes
Fax entosis has nothing to do with why supercapitals are required for taking and holding sov. Here’s why they’re necessary:
Because they have an ungodly amount of EHP, and do an ungodly amount of damage. So when there’s a fight over a structure, and the defenders show up to chase off your HAC fleet… you drop 200 titans on them. And you drop another 200 supercarriers a good 1,000km away and let your friendly Command Destroyers chain-bounce the fighter wing across the gap, even now.
They’re necessary because when—not if—that happens, the only effective response there is… is for the enemy to drop their supercapital fleet, and hope it’s bigger.
It has absolutely nothing to do with entosis.
[Edit: Oh, and as far as ‘only target 1 size lower’… welcome to smartbombing titans. A large SB doesn’t look like it’s got a huge radius, right? Now put it on an 18km-long Leviathan. Fit half a dozen of them. On 200 titans. See what that does to a hostile HAC fleet, and just how fast it does it.]
Except, as I’ve said before, the real issue is mobility. Especially with these changes, it will be more important than ever for mining ships to be able to move around to get to the next place to mine. And no, mining fleets aren’t going to gate around. That’s just suicidal—and slow. So you can either use a bridging titan… or just put everyone in Rorqs. Poof. That need for mobility isn’t going to change… but, like I said in another thread:
Welcome to human nature? The easiest way to beat someone up has always been ‘bring more friends’.
Except that’s a simultaneous disadvantage, too. Because that means that central point is able to be attacked from all those places, too.
2 Likes