Use the search tool or STFU.
yeah thought not
I think it’s good the force the Meta’s to change every so often however…
There are several ways this could have been done without nerfing huge areas of the game.
- Increase damage output to certain weapon modules / ammo types that would serve to negate resistances anyway thus delivering the same impact but only in the PvP arena.
- Apply the above change but also also the 20% resistance ‘debuff’ to NPC ships as well as player ships.
- Release modules that provide resistance ONLY to NPCs this would essentially mean you would have PvE fits that would maintain the buff against NPC events, however if you got caught by a player this would be meaningless as you’d have traded a benefit in one area for lower tank against another player.
The above serve to accomodate multiple playstyle instead of only target one single area and impact others unfairly.
I would like to ask CCP how they plan to address the fallout of PvE play that arises out of this update, and what if anything that will be doing to rebalance the issues this causes in that arena ?
Given you didn’t want to put up numbers when challenged yourself, you’ve got no legs to stand on calling anyone else out for numbers.
However, in this case you are both right.
Anderson is right that the reduction in tank assuming the same number of resist modules is the same percentage, which actually is worse in absolute terms for a T2 ship.
However you are right in terms of a T2 ship may be using less modules, so is less affected and is still able to get to a high resistance.
There is no PvP only arena. buffing weapon damage would have massively buffed PvE. Even the small buff they did to close range T2 ammo for close range weapons is going to increase some peoples income.
See above, there is no PvE only arena, there is no magic which only works against certain things, NPC’s and PC’s live in the same world.
They’ve already answered that, they will monitor it and fix any PvE that becomes unplayable.
1 Like
It was my first impression.
Dont worry there, I’m sure it wont mean much difference to whatever it is you do in highsec.
- base resists remain the same
- only modules are changing, and not all of them
- is this enough numbers for your inept mentality?
- i doubt you can even count this high tbvh
- stop crying
1 Like
I am going to enjoy the great gank show. Gankers ganking their own alts and posting them on the killboards. Lots of popcorn and skittles. In the meantime core omega players will continue to spiral downwards. I see Eve reached 40,000 players, impressive, but I bet about 30,000 of those are alphas and will quickly dissipate when the great shut down is over. Popcorn and skittles are the perfect condiments for the gnashing of teeth to come. Just wait for a few of these new players to be ganked by the code or goons just for giggles. Lol
4 Likes
Will you change CONCORD response times to balance these changes for non-combat ships?
5 Likes
@CCP_Dopamine It is obvious that you want to decrease the amount of minerals. But instead of continued nerfing and making the game less fun to play in respect to the PvE content, I’d like you to consider options. One I would suggest is to adjust the way of repairing things. Currently everything can be repaired for isk. (Stations repair over time and don’t consume anything for the process, not even isk.)
You could change that into minerals. That would be a smart way to increase the mineral consumption of the entire economy without nerving the game to unplayable. That change would make sense and would be plausible for all. Something’s broken - you need to fix it and therefore you need materials. Plausible.
You even cuold think about to add over time damage to structures and ships that need to be repaired with minerals. (A reference for such a solution is the old “Star Wars Galaxies” which was the best sandbox game in history until they tried to make it a theme park.)
Nobody is complaining that EVE is a PvP game but even the most PvP addicted player have to make some isk to afford their ships (which are crafted by PvE player,…)
Non stop nerfing is annoying, adding something new is fancy.
Even the blackout, which was called a good idea by most PvP player, in the end almost killed EVE. That’s a fact,… If only the PvP berserks remain, the game is dead - economy wins allways. If you want to make the economy more healty, please consider options that not just make PvP player happy.
Respectfully
X
5 Likes
There’s always an idiot who picks up on the specific phrase and misinterprets it to try and sound smart isn’t there…
- I never said PvP Only Arena, you know this but chose to be argumentative to sound clever. You know full well that this comment refers to the PvP ‘arena’ in terms of that aspect of gameplay, say something productive not pointless.
2+3. As above I never said PvE ONLY , I said the PvE arena which as anyone who plays EVE will know will refer to the PvE element of gameplay.
Lastly, ‘monitoring’ doesn’t mean anything to me, it doesn’t inspire trust or confidence, the fact is CCP should have run enough simulations now to know what the risks are that knock on impacts may occur and should have systems in place to correct or mitigate those, if a risk assessment has not been conducted for this patch then under no circumstances should they be releasing it.
2 Likes
I wonder how long Pearl Abyss will sit on the wayside. Maybe they will sell it, recoup some cash for Eve, who would buy it? To be truthful the game has a lot going for it. Deep skill tree, load of ships, lot of activities. But a very tiny minority of players seem have a grip on the game with senseless ganking. I am advocate of meaningful PVP. But the sort of ganking goons and The Code do are just a ruination of a good game. CCP seems scared of them, perhaps afraid of a subscription decline, and/or players working for CCP are in these pvp corps. In the end CCP going to have to do some soul searching, and I think that time is coming soon.
5 Likes
That suggests there is some accuracy to it and a chance of actually hitting the intended target. It’s more like the philosophy behind the russian Tsar Bomba: we can’t hit the broad side of a barn, so we’ll make the payload so big that that doesn’t matter. (was scaled down from 100MT to 50MT over concerns of fallout and that it might crack the planet)
2 Likes
ROFLMAO. Saying this (and a bunch of other nonsense) in reply to a post of mine where I’m telling him how he’s making a fool of himself for prophesying the demise of EvE, but being unable to go away himself… 
The fact that you are amused shows that you do not even understand the easiest posts in their meaning…
I would say i’m sorry but i’m just not surpised…it’s just like your kind is…nothing unexpected here…
You can have a PvP-free high-sec if we limit high-sec to an income generation cap of about 2 million ISK per hour to simulate exhausted resources, and then tax your income at a roughly 50% rate. After all, you can’t drill for oil in a city, and policemen aren’t free.
Be thankful for what you have already; cops aren’t going to magically appear in ten seconds if I decide to wait for you outside of your door and surprise-shank you for your bowl of porridge. 
2 Likes
You know what?
I(and many others) would accept this if still everything is possible(beside PVP)…
If you want more go into low and null and take the risk…but the tax rate is a joke right…just cut the income at 50% of low…
Nope, we have to actually tax revenue as opposed to base-lining PvE income in order to simulate the provision of government services (transportation networks, safety, etc). Because traders and manufacturers would still be able to generate high/unimpacted income streams otherwise.
But hey, look at this! We’re in agreement on something!
By the way, don’t kid yourself about “many others” accepting this.
Nothing is carved in stone,not your taxes nor the ‘we will never agree to anything’ dogma…
Hint hint. You will still have that. If you have already been doing said activity you, and your friends, will now struggle a little bit more, like a few months ago; therefore this update should actually increase your groups current satisfaction based on the very first thing you said you and your friends wanted from this game.
Edit: Well these forums are hard to follow lol! Well Destiny_Corrupted, I apologize for quoting your comment to reply to Lazrial_Sokarad. I tried to go back up the thread but I am not finding the original comment I should have quoted or I was scrolling too fast and passed the original comment.
CCP needs to nerf the forums back to the old one!!! lol!