open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

Arakkis Melanogaster
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:54:00 - [1081]
 

R64 moons were the fuel keeping the 0.0 sandbox in a constant state of war because they were extremely lucrative and unique. They were the rare material that the empire industrialists needed to produce their goods, and made it worth throwing massive war machines against each other, thus producing a cycle. Nerfing the R64 moons in coordination with the sweeping changes to 0.0 is causing a massive flux in the reason for accepting the risk and effort of living in 0.0. Fixing the sov system and implementing changes to how 0.0 works is fine (and overdue), but you must provide a carrot for people to accept taking the stick. Were the status quo in terms of R64 moons kept, even if the new system upgrade system doesn't produce the desired changes to alliance and personal income, alliances will still have a reason to hold space, and continue adapting to tweaks to the system going forward. If the system doesn't work as planned, and alliances have no incentive to continue living in 0.0, individuals will have no reason to keep putting in the work to keep the alliance going. However, should the upgraded space work with minor tweaking, there will be a adaptation period, after which R64s can be nerfed and the prices of upkeep can be tweaked.

Implementing a sweeping change to the basic structure of how any game works always results in unhappy players due to the balancing the needs to take place once the playerbase discovers the unforeseen weaknesses in the plan. Implementing multiple sweeping changes to a game all at once is a recipe for disaster as most players will simply throw up their hands and move on to something else.

I admire the hard work and temerity it takes to make these upcoming changes, but listen to your players and do this slower or you may risk the NGE of EVE.

Headwires
The Scope
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:54:00 - [1082]
 

Originally by: Kuzim Blaky'all
sup sup,

a dawg talk to a dawg an him explain to a dawg that recyclien industry in mad trubblz.

dig it, recyclien a rouff gig to get into, an now if a dawg aint got so much places to go, its gonan be even harder.

cant sustaine more than maybe a few recycliars, an top dawgs want to make it so a dawg cant even see whats goin on?

i been playing eve side since i can remember
sad to see it burn in the start of december
for christmas, a dawg just wanted black magic
instead you givein dawgs a piece of black coal? tragic.
a dawg what a buff to recyclien goods
in places him call his neighborhoods
but you aint doing nothin for a posse who thrive
(even tho we've been a thousan tims brought alive)
looks like re-re gonan take a final nap
kuz da ccp posse, them dont give a crap
a dawg cant afford to run him posse
if him gonan be forced to be runnin at a loss, see
hope to see a posse post December come an go,
but da wind of change be blowin, so dawg, i dunno.
no dawg,
say it aint so dawg
otherwise its time fo da re-re to never again log.





kuzim blak for csm 2009

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:55:00 - [1083]
 

Originally by: ep1k
So why exactly do i want to run anomalies in 0.0 instead of level 4s? Whatever change you make unless it makes someone running level 4s go "wow man i need to head out to 0.0 and get me some of that!" its pointless. All these stupid ass changes make me do is go "wow i need to go out to motsu and get me some of that!"

It's even wider than that. What, exactly, is the point of 0.0 now?

Moon income is nerfed, plus alchemy means that r64s aren't even necessary any more. So Alliance income is reduced.
Alliances effectively have to pay rent now for their systems. So Alliance costs are increased.
Individual income is, at best, on a par with highsec L4 missions. Factor in ship losses to roaming gangs, increased costs and God only knows tax rates post-Dominion and individual income is worse than highsec.

So it's going to be worse for Alliances and worse for individuals. So...why bother?

Pwadoc
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.07 19:57:00 - [1084]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.

...

We want the sites to scale so each site needs a group and has appropriate rewards however we face some issues as the older sites were from simpler times before lots of ship balancing and have stupid NPCs for example which turn group content into solo content in difficulty (ironically the greatest flaw in the lvl 4 missions).


Your goal with this update is to draw more players out to 0.0 space. As it stands, the modifications will have the exact opposite effect. The genesis of the problem is the disproportionate profitability of empire lvl 4s. You should have fixed that problem first, and then worked on the sov system.

A simple solution to your problem exists. Remove high-sec lvl 4 agents.

Mrs Trzzbk
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:00:00 - [1085]
 

Originally by: Normin Bates
Geez.

I hope CCP doesn't buckle under the pressure of the tears and whines on here. Implement as intended and adjust later FFS.


I, too, hope CCP doesn't listen to any feedback from the players who actually live in 0.0 and just ram through their horribly thought out patch that will totally ruin 0.0 space!

Elo Behram
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:02:00 - [1086]
 

The reason alliances hold a lot of space is that there are actually very few systems worth holding (ones with high-end moons or good truesec and belts). Basic idea behind Dominion: make space expensive in bulk so alliances have to shed unused space but lucrative in small portions that new alliances can move in and upgrade.

You put the first part in but forgot the second. Anomalies and wormholes aren't going to motivate these theoretical new players to exit Empire and come to nullsec because a typical "crappy" system that the bigger powers would be abandoning and new ones moving into (think low truesec, <10 belts, and no R32 or R64 moons) can't be upgraded to a point where it's competitive with L4 missions or the "core" space that the established powers will be keeping. Anomalies aren't going to get you there. Mining and profession sites aren't going to get you there. Plexes might get you there for a while until the deadspace markets crash, and then they'll be ****ed.

Nevada Tan
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:03:00 - [1087]
 

The funniest thing will be if CCP succeeds in their unwritten goal of utterly ruining 0.0, the numbers of suicide gankings will go up through the roof purely through people going "If I'm going to go, I'm going to go with a bang"

Hope you weren't expecting to be able to run any missions anywhere, Empire newbies.

CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.11.07 20:03:00 - [1088]
 

Originally by: Mikal Drey
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The role of the Territorial Claim Unit (TCU) changed since the original figures were generated to be only a marker for sovereignty and the last thing to be removed after a system has been taken (details on this are coming soon in Abathur's next blog). This means the cost for the TCU should be reasonable in terms of upkeep and we are looking at 1 mill per day currently for that dot on the map.



the role of the TCU ?

for a moment ther i believed you guys actually played the game and tested on SISI :/

TCU = F.L.A.G

from 20mil a day to 1mil is a dramatic shift in numbers. have you been reconsidering this for some time and the dev blog posted incorrect numbers or has this thread caused a ninja backtrack ?

one of the most important questions hasnt even been mentioned . . SEEDING !




Suggest you take a closer look at the next update of singularity. The names we mention (both in this blog and Abathur's next blog which covers the conquest system) are the finalised names Yes we realise the TCU was its old original name ugh.

As mentioned, the TCU has changed in its role in the conquest chain to the last thing that is destroyed before you plant your own TCU as the invader. Its role therefore is purely to unlock everything else and for that dot on the map and that we feel justified the low cost of the TCU itself. However when you go from TCU to include the infrastructure hub and consequently any upgrade, the costs start to climb.

We also cover seeding, in the next blog or after where we talk transition between old and new. TCU's will be seeded automatically within solar systems you are currently sovereign of and your sovereignty times will be backdated to what you have when the servers go down which will adjust the strategic index starting level as a result to effectively what level of sov you have now.

We will then give you a grace period (week or more) to choose what strategic upgrades you want to continue to have in each solar system and install those after which when the grace period has passed, any strategic structures in systems not upgraded will be oflined such as what occurs when sovereignty is lost now.

The hubs and upgrades will currently be available like starbase modules from the NPC market at Concord/DED stations

Tomas Russell
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:04:00 - [1089]
 

Edited by: Tomas Russell on 07/11/2009 20:04:33
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Nyphur

5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?


Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.

Do you realise that this is not even close to being an answer to his question? And that it reads like a cross between the autistic kid that eats glue in grade 3b and a marketing executive?

"Gnargle gnarf blurf, square root of seventy three, incentivize the synergy of your human resource, burble".

No offense meant, if you are actually the autistic kid who eats glue in grade 3b, or a CCP marketing executive. Or both.

Ariane VoxDei
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:05:00 - [1090]
 

I'd like to take a moment to remind a lot of you of something.

Remember how you were all busy gloating and mocking over the 11% NPC corp tax that mostly effects empire dwelling mission runners - and how you forgot to think about the principles at stake?

You are not laughing so much any more, are you. Hello 0.0 taxation.
I am not gloating or "schadenfroh", I am just saying I saw it coming and so should you.
Instead you are now stuck in the same mud that you didn't want to help the carebears out of.

Say no to unnessary taxation, even if it does not hit you - next time it might. Think about it.

Pattern Clarc
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:08:00 - [1091]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

Quote:

5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?


Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.


The most important part of a 0.0 fix been left out of the 0.0 fix???

Could you just not delay the patch until you had this content built in???

Crucifier
Gank Bangers
Moar Tears
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:08:00 - [1092]
 

Originally by: Ariane VoxDei
I'd like to take a moment to remind a lot of you of something.

Remember how you were all busy gloating and mocking over the 11% NPC corp tax that mostly effects empire dwelling mission runners - and how you forgot to think about the principles at stake?

You are not laughing so much any more, are you. Hello 0.0 taxation.
I am not gloating or "schadenfroh", I am just saying I saw it coming and so should you.
Instead you are now stuck in the same mud that you didn't want to help the carebears out of.

Say no to unnessary taxation, even if it does not hit you - next time it might. Think about it.


It wasn't unnecessary in highsec, lvl 4s are too much isk for no risk

L'Artest
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:08:00 - [1093]
 

Originally by: Kuzim Blaky'all
sup sup,

a dawg talk to a dawg an him explain to a dawg that recyclien industry in mad trubblz.

dig it, recyclien a rouff gig to get into, an now if a dawg aint got so much places to go, its gonan be even harder.

cant sustaine more than maybe a few recycliars, an top dawgs want to make it so a dawg cant even see whats goin on?

i been playing eve side since i can remember
sad to see it burn in the start of december
for christmas, a dawg just wanted black magic
instead you givein dawgs a piece of black coal? tragic.
a dawg what a buff to recyclien goods
in places him call his neighborhoods
but you aint doing nothin for a posse who thrive
(even tho we've been a thousan tims brought alive)
looks like re-re gonan take a final nap
kuz da ccp posse, them dont give a crap
a dawg cant afford to run him posse
if him gonan be forced to be runnin at a loss, see
hope to see a posse post December come an go,
but da wind of change be blowin, so dawg, i dunno.
no dawg,
say it aint so dawg
otherwise its time fo da re-re to never again log.




this cant be quoted enough

Professor Dumbledore
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:10:00 - [1094]
 

Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: Professor Dumbledore
If you guys are too stupid to see you will kill this game with this by now then you deserve for the game to die.


There's constructive posts and then there's **** like this, stop posting thanks


Yes because its quite clear constructive posts are surely getting though their thicks skulls and undersized brains.

cok cola
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:11:00 - [1095]
 

ccp, why dont u limit the number of missions lvl 4 agents in highsec give out per hour, why should a 0.0 system ppl have paid to upgrade only support 15 (MAX) players taking risks when a risk free highsec system like motsu supports hundreds of carebears with the same isk / hr(its actually limitless and depends more on how much lag theyre willing to put up with) u said you were going to give people a reason to come to 0.0, you have NOT DONE THIS!!!

dominion is lacking 2 things! something for 0.0 entities to fight over, and a reason for highsec entities to come to 0.0.

proceed with the ship changes and skip the sov changes, you guys need to go back and accomplish the things you said you were going to accomplish, this is not it. This is exodus meets NGE

creating more deadspace items is just going to drop their price, and these items arent even taxable by the alliance PAYING to provide their members with them. why should an alliance PAY to provide their members with the same isk/hr they could get RISK FREE with a lvl 4 mission alt which can be trained VERY QUICKLY.

Hazecat
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:12:00 - [1096]
 

Originally by: MpozoY
If you want a net flow of people from empire to 0.0, the amount of space held (officially or not) by major alliances is irrelevant. All that matters is risk/reward. You have to have an accessible income source that exceeds - not matches, exceeds- that of L4 missions (counting bounty, loot and LP rewards) sufficiently enough to outweigh the significant risk of being blown up / podded every time you undock, and having your stuff locked in a station you can't dock in. None of the proposed solutions come close, even in a fully upgraded system, even before you factor in upkeep fees. If you shift this risk/reward (by requiring higher taxes etc.) you will get a net flow of players from 0.0 to empire instead, assuming they stay signed up.

Less reward at the individual and alliance level (i.e. nerfed moons) means less motiviation to contest space. This means less of the epic fleet fights that are critical to Eve's reputation. The larger alliances distribute moon income in the form of ships/reimbursements for PvP, but with the moon nerf, the current level of this is almost assuredly unsupportable.

Shifting the risk/reward of 0.0 means fewer carebears in 0.0, meaning fewer targets for gankers. This leaves less to do for defense gangs, which leaves less to do for HAC fleets, rippling up the chain. This means fewer people in 0.0 overall, as they either log in their L4-running alts out of boredom, move to empire for good, or unsub. This is directly counter to the stated CCP goal of pushing more kids into the 0.0 sandbox.

If you want to get and keep people in 0.0, you must have an income source that is noticeably superior to any empire source, especially L4's. Period. End of story. If you instead add to the cost of 0.0, people will leave and not be replaced.


You took the word right outta my mouth.

MuCoo
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:12:00 - [1097]
 

I am so glad that all our small alliances and corps are so rich now to afford living in0.0. I'm just wandering what is CCP thinking charging so much for the system upgrades. It cost us enought to keep pos's up and running, now we have to worry abuot the extra cost of keeping sov. I wander whats going to happen next, we aare all going to have to sell gtc's just so we can afford our systems. I guess thats what they have in mind, so they can make more real money from us.

Sergi Povitch
Gatehoppers
Shadow of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:13:00 - [1098]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Mikal Drey
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The role of the Territorial Claim Unit (TCU) changed since the original figures were generated to be only a marker for sovereignty and the last thing to be removed after a system has been taken (details on this are coming soon in Abathur's next blog). This means the cost for the TCU should be reasonable in terms of upkeep and we are looking at 1 mill per day currently for that dot on the map.



the role of the TCU ?

for a moment ther i believed you guys actually played the game and tested on SISI :/

TCU = F.L.A.G

from 20mil a day to 1mil is a dramatic shift in numbers. have you been reconsidering this for some time and the dev blog posted incorrect numbers or has this thread caused a ninja backtrack ?

one of the most important questions hasnt even been mentioned . . SEEDING !




Suggest you take a closer look at the next update of singularity. The names we mention (both in this blog and Abathur's next blog which covers the conquest system) are the finalised names Yes we realise the TCU was its old original name ugh.

As mentioned, the TCU has changed in its role in the conquest chain to the last thing that is destroyed before you plant your own TCU as the invader. Its role therefore is purely to unlock everything else and for that dot on the map and that we feel justified the low cost of the TCU itself. However when you go from TCU to include the infrastructure hub and consequently any upgrade, the costs start to climb.

We also cover seeding, in the next blog or after where we talk transition between old and new. TCU's will be seeded automatically within solar systems you are currently sovereign of and your sovereignty times will be backdated to what you have when the servers go down which will adjust the strategic index starting level as a result to effectively what level of sov you have now.

We will then give you a grace period (week or more) to choose what strategic upgrades you want to continue to have in each solar system and install those after which when the grace period has passed, any strategic structures in systems not upgraded will be oflined such as what occurs when sovereignty is lost now.

The hubs and upgrades will currently be available like starbase modules from the NPC market at Concord/DED stations



How many m3 are the upgrades? indi sized, frieghter sized? do I have to fill them with stuff like the outpost eggs. Do I have to guard them till downtime?

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:13:00 - [1099]
 

Remove highsec L4 missions.

Magnum III
Journey On Squad
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:14:00 - [1100]
 

Edited by: Magnum III on 07/11/2009 21:20:13

You got to make it not just worth it but interesting and fun to have more people go to 0.0

This just gives the leaders something to do, were is the fun for a person to want to go there and not just become a pawn being told what to do?

Because the leaders will just tell you what system to stay in and mine or rat or whatever, and you darn well better do it.

I'm not going out there to 0.0 to be stuck in one system just so some Allaince can keep their everage pilot numbers up in that system make isk for them. You got to be kidding.

0.0 still sounds like a dictatorship and how is that fun?

Cefte
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:14:00 - [1101]
 

Originally by: Ariane VoxDei
I'd like to take a moment to remind a lot of you of something.

Remember how you were all busy gloating and mocking over the 11% NPC corp tax that mostly effects empire dwelling mission runners - and how you forgot to think about the principles at stake?

You are not laughing so much any more, are you. Hello 0.0 taxation.
I am not gloating or "schadenfroh", I am just saying I saw it coming and so should you.
Instead you are now stuck in the same mud that you didn't want to help the carebears out of.

Say no to unnessary taxation, even if it does not hit you - next time it might. Think about it.

The principle at stake is risk versus reward. Level 4 mission runners in empire have been risking nothing for the opportunity to access infinitely scaling opportunities to reap the the second-highest isk per hour ratio in the game.

0.0 players risk playing without Concord, without the warning of wardecs, without massive NPC seeded markets, constructing their own stations and risking losing everything within those stations, for five or six people per region to exceed the isk per hour of level 4 missions with exploration, for moon gold for those few alliances lucky enough, large enough and rich enough to be able to defend it, and for a few dozen people to make roughly that isk per hour ratting in the few systems with adequate truesec and sufficient belts to sustain them.

And that was bloody awful, and that's before Dominion.

Now exploration is going to tank with oversupply, moon gold is going to become pointless, and ratting isk will drop from being on-par with level 4s to far below level 4s to pay for simply having basic services within space, and fighting over anomalies that will with massive investment manage to scale to support ten people at once, while you sit back and make what will now become the single most profitable per-hour exercise in the game. Post-tax.

So yeah, take your carefully self-labelled 'not gloating' gloating and get the hell back to your CCP-approved isk fountain, and let us know when the issue of risk versus reward means anything to you beyond the chance that you forget to turn on your Pith X-Type Booster until you're already in structure. From rats.


JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:14:00 - [1102]
 

Originally by: Tomas Russell
Edited by: Tomas Russell on 07/11/2009 20:04:33
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Nyphur

5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?


Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.

Do you realise that this is not even close to being an answer to his question? And that it reads like a cross between the autistic kid that eats glue in grade 3b and a marketing executive?

"Gnargle gnarf blurf, square root of seventy three, incentivize the synergy of your human resource, burble".

No offense meant, if you are actually the autistic kid who eats glue in grade 3b, or a CCP marketing executive. Or both.


Well plexes and wormholes are , i guess anomalys are just to keep constant isks flows so you have always something to farm isks from.


sam0r
Trux Germani
Ev0ke
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:15:00 - [1103]
 

Originally by: Nyphur
Another idea I had was the possibility of taxing NPC kills in a system rather than just those within a corp. It's an idea just to support the NRDS people that can't reap taxes from the people that use their space. Perhaps they could set their hub to collect a 10% tax off NPCers in their system automatically.

Yeah, that would be awesome! And btw: Making sth more expensive doesn't mean that more people will buy it... the costs are way too much.

CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.11.07 20:18:00 - [1104]
 

Originally by: Tomas Russell
Edited by: Tomas Russell on 07/11/2009 20:04:33
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Nyphur

5) Why is 0.0 not more profitable than level 4 missions, even after the upgrades?


Always because the jump between 0 and 1 is the largest in cost and effort of each activity beyond that. We are acutely aware of this issue and the related issue of agents in sovereign space. Ideally we will tackle both issues with brand new content specifically designed for social groups and adequately rewarding.

Do you realise that this is not even close to being an answer to his question? And that it reads like a cross between the autistic kid that eats glue in grade 3b and a marketing executive?

"Gnargle gnarf blurf, square root of seventy three, incentivize the synergy of your human resource, burble".

No offense meant, if you are actually the autistic kid who eats glue in grade 3b, or a CCP marketing executive. Or both.


Plain text answer for those who don't get the reference (sorry).

- The jump between no risk and any risk is the most significant step, the same as no cost and some cost. The difference in mathematical terms is small but economically large. In short, it takes a disproportionate amount of reward to offset a smaller amount of risk or additional effort.

- We are looking at introducing social group content as Soundwave mentions of sufficient reward to compel you either as someone who runs missions in empire to fund their pvp in null sec or as an empire dweller looking to make the leap to join up with others and seek to upgrade your solar systems to unlock these sites. These will act to both minimise the number of signatures as a whole within the solar system and to let you play together than alone.

- yes we are very aware of the 'level four missions' issue in relative activity income potentials to everything else.

marxist revolutionary
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:19:00 - [1105]
 

Originally by: Cefte
Originally by: Ariane VoxDei
I'd like to take a moment to remind a lot of you of something.

Remember how you were all busy gloating and mocking over the 11% NPC corp tax that mostly effects empire dwelling mission runners - and how you forgot to think about the principles at stake?

You are not laughing so much any more, are you. Hello 0.0 taxation.
I am not gloating or "schadenfroh", I am just saying I saw it coming and so should you.
Instead you are now stuck in the same mud that you didn't want to help the carebears out of.

Say no to unnessary taxation, even if it does not hit you - next time it might. Think about it.

The principle at stake is risk versus reward. Level 4 mission runners in empire have been risking nothing for the opportunity to access infinitely scaling opportunities to reap the the second-highest isk per hour ratio in the game.

0.0 players risk playing without Concord, without the warning of wardecs, without massive NPC seeded markets, constructing their own stations and risking losing everything within those stations, for five or six people per region to exceed the isk per hour of level 4 missions with exploration, for moon gold for those few alliances lucky enough, large enough and rich enough to be able to defend it, and for a few dozen people to make roughly that isk per hour ratting in the few systems with adequate truesec and sufficient belts to sustain them.

And that was bloody awful, and that's before Dominion.

Now exploration is going to tank with oversupply, moon gold is going to become pointless, and ratting isk will drop from being on-par with level 4s to far below level 4s to pay for simply having basic services within space, and fighting over anomalies that will with massive investment manage to scale to support ten people at once, while you sit back and make what will now become the single most profitable per-hour exercise in the game. Post-tax.

So yeah, take your carefully self-labelled 'not gloating' gloating and get the hell back to your CCP-approved isk fountain, and let us know when the issue of risk versus reward means anything to you beyond the chance that you forget to turn on your Pith X-Type Booster until you're already in structure. From rats.




i wonder how weasley button would respond to this post

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:19:00 - [1106]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
- yes we are very aware of the 'level four missions' issue in relative activity income potentials to everything else.

Great!

What's the planned fix?

DaiTengu
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:20:00 - [1107]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

I completely agree that systems will be able to sustain about 10, possibly 15 people active at one time (which to be fair is a pretty massive increase from what we can do now). It's not the perfect solution, but it gives us a pretty solid base to work from.

In terms of the upkeep costs, remember that you'll be getting rid of towers and the fuel costs for said towers. If it turns out that the system cost here is backbreaking for alliances, it's something we can re-visit.


Ugh, I can't believe I just spent 2 hours reading through this thread trying to catch up.

with 10-15 anomalies, you're not going to be able to support 10-15 ratters. It scales similar to asteroid belts. While the 15-20 belts I've seen mentioned for one person is a bit off, (I can make 30m+ an hour ratting in a 7-belt system by myself, after grooming it most of the day) you're going to run into problems with anomalies.

If there's 10 people in system, and 15 anomalies, you have a 2/3 chance of warping to an anomaly and finding someone else there. Figure it takes a couple minutes to scan one down and warp to it. you can waste up to 15 minutes just getting to one. Now scale that up to 15 people in system, and 15 anomalies. you have a 1/15 chance of picking the one that no one is at. Good luck, I hope you don't mind wasting 30+ minutes just trying to find an anomaly that no one is at, shooting things for 5 minutes, getting 5-10m ISK if you're lucky, and then repeating the whole process. Not to mention one or two AFK cloakers in a system can completely shut down the ability to earn ISK in that system. Seriously, park an AFK newbie-alt with a protocloak in an imicus somewhere, and an alliance will be effectively dishing out 2b isk for nothing.

Also, with the nerf to moon mining income, an alliance isn't going to be able to afford these upgrades. The only reason we can afford POS fuel now, or the logistics to fuel the towers is because of the R64 income. The towers aren't going to go away like you say they are. You still need bridges, jammers, and beacons. You still will have moon mining POSes as long as they can eek out a bit of passive income without too much :effort:. So what you're adding here is enough stuff to effectively double the cost of running space, while cutting the alliance-level income.

I fail to see how any of this is going to result in epic battles. No one is going to want to take more space. You might get a few tiny alliances that spent months running level 4s in empire, and have some ISK to blow, so they want to try owning 0.0 space. They'll either become renter-pets, or wind up getting outblobbed by the larger alliances. They'll realize that paying a ton of ISK each month just to potentially see their name on soverignity.jpg really isn't worth it, and that they can make a lot more isk just running level 4s in empire.

If you want epic space battles (I sure as hell do!) you need to make 0.0 worth it. This makes 0.0 worth LESS than what it is now. You're taking away the thing we currently fight over (R64 income), and then increasing the costs to own space.

Large alliances currently subsidize their members by paying for ship losses, capital ship losses, and sometimes even handing out free supercaps. This won't be possible anymore. 0.0 is going to become stagnant. There's nothing to fight over, and no one will want to risk assets they can't afford to replace to fight for them. Even roaming ~wulfpax~ will disappear as there will be no one to shoot at.

As I said before, go back to the drawing board on this one. I'm not sure if all your departments are working together or not on this, because to me it just seems like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. This potentially would have worked well had you decided not to nerf R64s as well.



CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.11.07 20:21:00 - [1108]
 

Originally by: Sergi Povitch
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Mikal Drey
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
The role of the Territorial Claim Unit (TCU) changed since the original figures were generated to be only a marker for sovereignty and the last thing to be removed after a system has been taken (details on this are coming soon in Abathur's next blog). This means the cost for the TCU should be reasonable in terms of upkeep and we are looking at 1 mill per day currently for that dot on the map.



the role of the TCU ?

for a moment ther i believed you guys actually played the game and tested on SISI :/

TCU = F.L.A.G

from 20mil a day to 1mil is a dramatic shift in numbers. have you been reconsidering this for some time and the dev blog posted incorrect numbers or has this thread caused a ninja backtrack ?

one of the most important questions hasnt even been mentioned . . SEEDING !




Suggest you take a closer look at the next update of singularity. The names we mention (both in this blog and Abathur's next blog which covers the conquest system) are the finalised names Yes we realise the TCU was its old original name ugh.

As mentioned, the TCU has changed in its role in the conquest chain to the last thing that is destroyed before you plant your own TCU as the invader. Its role therefore is purely to unlock everything else and for that dot on the map and that we feel justified the low cost of the TCU itself. However when you go from TCU to include the infrastructure hub and consequently any upgrade, the costs start to climb.

We also cover seeding, in the next blog or after where we talk transition between old and new. TCU's will be seeded automatically within solar systems you are currently sovereign of and your sovereignty times will be backdated to what you have when the servers go down which will adjust the strategic index starting level as a result to effectively what level of sov you have now.

We will then give you a grace period (week or more) to choose what strategic upgrades you want to continue to have in each solar system and install those after which when the grace period has passed, any strategic structures in systems not upgraded will be oflined such as what occurs when sovereignty is lost now.

The hubs and upgrades will currently be available like starbase modules from the NPC market at Concord/DED stations



How many m3 are the upgrades? indi sized, frieghter sized? do I have to fill them with stuff like the outpost eggs. Do I have to guard them till downtime?




they range from industrial to the level V upgrades being freighter sized. No there is no materials needed, they are just like starbase structures. You launch for corp and anchor/online them where allowed.

MicheldiAngelo
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:21:00 - [1109]
 

it looks that most of you is missing the point of this blog and what this introduce to eve game

Before Dominion : you fuel POS`s, you have sov
After Dominion : you fuel POS`s, you pay "Bill", you have sov - with "promise" for something more

I dont know like you members of eve- comunity, but i feel like someone just trying to catch me in bad way. Also what is funny, becouse this is just a game, nobody can do nothing, but there are some countries that for that kind of things [ i mean this "fix sov thing" ] ppl are going to Jail - for ppl that dont simply understood - this something that was first spoted in Itally.

cheers

Korodan
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2009.11.07 20:22:00 - [1110]
 

Originally by: Itzena
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
- yes we are very aware of the 'level four missions' issue in relative activity income potentials to everything else.

Great!

What's the planned fix?


Yes, how will you be nerfing level 4 mission runners?


Pages: first : previous : ... 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 ... : last (119)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only