Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 22:49:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Typhado3 on 14/09/2009 22:56:17 <3
awesome, sounds very awesome
One thing I'm hoping you do here is make ways for alliances to defend themselves better. I remember a long time ago burn eden camping my old alliance into station with cloaked ravens and rapiers sitting on all our gates (nearly got a rapier with a bait mammoth but nano prevailed).
Fact is right now it's damn near impossible to get someone out of your space if they have half a brain and a cloak. It's also impractical to keep people out as running 3 or so non stop gate camps to block all the entrances is never gonna work. If you increase the number of people in 0.0 your gonna see a lot of people sneaking in and cloaking to disrupt enemy income. I'll probably be one of the people doing this and unless the target has combat pilots standing ready to warp in save a half dead target and kill a cloaking nano/ecm raider they are gonna start to lose their carebears.
so how bout giving some tools to help defend so it's not all on the attackers side. ------------------------------
Just a crazy inventor ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
|
Mkiaki
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 22:50:00 -
[32]
Posting on second page of an epic thread.
So a good Goon Nerf.
Always a good thing
|
Louis deGuerre
Gallente VA Holding Void Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 22:53:00 -
[33]
* takes a shower in the tears of the big alliance CEOs *
Problem is of course, this is EVE, if it's too good to be true, it usually is. --- Sol: A microwarp drive? In a battleship? Are you insane? They arenĘt built for this! Clear Skies - The Movie
|
Cpt Constantinus
Celestial Janissaries
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 22:55:00 -
[34]
Quote: A system to do this can be fairly lightweight. It needs to handle systems changing hands, of course, but it can afford to be descriptive, rather than prescriptive. Currently we have a prescriptive sovereignty system: you fight over sovereignty explicitly, with the sovereignty mechanics determining who owns the system. A descriptive system says who's in charge, so it only needs to change hands after the dust has settled and one side has emerged triumphant. The actual fighting is deregulated - rather than mechanically telling you what to do (shoot sixty hardened starbases), you just need to do whatever it is you need to do so that at the end of the day the enemy goes away.
So instead of station pingpong, which will be thankfully avoided, we probably get system pingpong? Alliance 1 attacks a system of alliance 2 when there are asleep, "conquers" the system and leaves sooner or later. Alliance 2 wakes up and reconquers their space because alliance 1 is asleep/away/whatever. Rince and repeat ad nauseam. I can imagine that it gets pretty tireing to check every morning if your alliance has lost a system during the nightshift, especialy if the reconquering part is equaly boring because alliance 1 is already away.
Is that your plan for 0.0 or did i read something wrong?
|
xttz
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 22:57:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Bilbo II We already knew they were gonna change everything, no new news here. When will we get some details?
Shortly after we begin walking in stations.
Greyscale: That was a whole lot of words to say very little. If you're trying to advertise null-sec, you'd do well to provide hard figures rather than just being figurative. Black Ops BS sounded good on paper but took 4 patches to be of any use. Adjusting HICs + dictors to curb titans and lowsec supercaps sounded fantastic, but resulted in rendering all motherships virtually useless. Hell even cynojammers sounded like great strategic objectives on paper, and we all know how they turned out. Publish the details now and let the community get the issues ironed out early. Because it's not like CCP really have the best track record at seeing the big picture.
|
Vyktor Abyss
Gallente The Abyss Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:04:00 -
[36]
I'm very glad you decided to brain-dump on us...
I personally do find this all fasciating to see where you think the future of 0.0 Eve gameplay is going.
I'm pleasantly surprised to see that after all the previous "re-arranging of furniture", you're still open to flattening the building if its not really working and hopeful of coming up with a new, more functional plan.
I can honestly (unbiasedly) say it restores my faith in the long term ambition of Eve/CCP to see you do something like this. I will however point out and add that for several years in my opinion the only true "creators" of an emergent 0.0 environment have been CVA in Providence.
They have cultivated pretty much a nation state there unlike anywhere else in Eve with a lot of hard graft and real openess and cooperation at an individual, corporate, alliance and 'multi-alliance' level which has actually been improving and opening up 0.0 for years with a model that required real day to day effort (not just a bubble on the entry point).
My only concern is for them, and I hope you will not devalue all their previous efforts by making their "most developed" 0.0 Providence region more vulnerable or unsustainable considering most of the emergent play you desire actually already happens in that space.
I know their efforts and diplomatic model may place them ahead of most other alliances in some ways with this propsed new system, but at the same time I hope some form of consideration for them (and any similar 'positive' 0.0 entities I've not met) is needed so you don't jeopardise the community (not just the stations) that has already been built.
All in all though, a great blog. I'll be very interested to read the next one with more details on the actual mechanisms and transition for making it to the new "toilet in the bathroom" plan.
PS - No glass windows in the new bathroom please, as I really don't like watching people poo. Ta.
|
Smyrk
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:04:00 -
[37]
Quote: there's a lot of players who'd like to try it out but can't seem to get started - in no small part because of the problems outlined in the first few paragraphs
You're describing me, and others in my corp, so you're sort of preaching to the choir with us. That said, I am curious how far you hope to go with this -- do your ideas scale down sovereignty from the current "2-3000" pilot organizations to...200? all the way to 20? or are you rather hoping to provide ways for current outsiders to more easily form new huge alliances or help existing ones? I get the impression that it's more the latter; that you hope to motivate large alliances to include smaller groups in their activities, but that the smaller groups would not be independent (or even mostly independent) nullsec operators. But I'd like to be wrong.
As I mentioned in feedback to the previous sovereignty dev blog, I'd be interested to see w-space used as a gate to regions of nullsec that are not connected to current k-space. Wormholes provide a bottleneck that would keep the current nullsec empires from easily taking over such new space, giving it a level playing field and potentially even scoping those nullsec pockets for smaller-scale sovereign states.
|
KuKu Lula
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:04:00 -
[38]
If one of your goals is to draw carebears out into 0.0; something to consider.
Standings.
In todays world of lengthy blue lists; you often have people operating out of or passing through each others space. Your renter carebears, which change so often your own corpies don't even keep track of them - are going to get caught in the mix the whole time.
Nice to hear some more of the concepts, although still want more facts instead of just theory!
Very very interested to hear how you plan to handle the switchover of sov/cyno jammers. We've all seen what happens when a cyno jammer network goes offline, ala bob. (But everyone will be in the same boat won't cut it btw).
|
Zastrow J
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:05:00 -
[39]
this isnt a goon nerf, if you divide our population by how many systems we own we come out pretty decently in terms of population density. I'm still mulling over this dev blog because it's pretty high level and I'm not entirely sure the changes that are coming will bring about the results everyone wants
|
Mkiaki
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:07:00 -
[40]
Chaos is what I want. Total and utter **** hit the fan chaos
|
|
Frug
Repo Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:07:00 -
[41]
Awesome blog. <3 you CCP (for now)
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Whisper/PrismX 4 emperor |
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:08:00 -
[42]
Absolute fail blog, one of the worst ever written due to simple fact of being worthless pile of words. We know CCP does not want any fo the alliances to develop into stable player driven states, but will be thrilled to see a bunch of Stealth Bombers from some 100 man alliance made three days earlier destabilize anything that players worked hard to build for years. We're probably beyond the point of trying to see any point in that, but oh well that's life. But for all our sakes give us something to work with! Stop producing pointless walls of text that say nothing and get to the point already. Now it seems you very much want to do something, you have some aims but no idea what to do about it.
Secondly you say that player's decissions are waht matters. What if the alliances made the decission NOT to want any people form other parts of New Eden live in their space? What if the do NOT want to interact with the small groups you are so concerned about? That probably doesn't matter to CCP, which sort of contradicts the idea of player's decission being important.
|
Weaselior
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:10:00 -
[43]
Edited by: Weaselior on 14/09/2009 23:11:03
Originally by: Mkiaki Posting on second page of an epic thread.
So a good Goon Nerf.
Always a good thing
any 0.0 change that rewards population will surely hurt the biggest corporation and biggest alliance in the game, population-wise
also, that is a lot of words saying very little but I dislike the notion that sov will be nothing more than your name on the map Sig removed, inappropriate content - Mitnal |
Melos Tellemey
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:13:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Melos Tellemey on 14/09/2009 23:13:59 For those who say the blog is a worthless pile of word's without any details. Please read the end bit. and not just give up before reading the whole thing.
That was the whole point of the blog. It was a thought/process info dump. It is not meant to tell us what we get to put in systems, or exactly how large the gate rent fee will be. It's entire purpose is to help is understand the logic behind the changes, and Why it is changing.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:15:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Mkiaki So a good Goon Nerf.
Don't count on it, we won't be anything like the worst hit by this.
|
Pnuka
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:15:00 -
[46]
Down with big corporations, down with the rich, down with America!!
|
Manfred Rickenbocker
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:16:00 -
[47]
Cool, CCP mentioning a neat fact like Dunbar's number... Does this mean that y'all will be hiring an on-staff sociologist like you have an on-staff economist?
That aside, the one takeaway I get is this: 1) The truesec rating for most systems will be reset to true 0, and owning alliances will then continually upgrade (downgrade?) the truesec to -1.0. 2) As the truesec lowers, you will get an increasing cost in rent 3) The more systems you have, the overall maintenance will increase 4) Lower truesec will bring bigger rats, better exploration, more belts, so on? 5) What about the Dysprosium moons? Are you all switching moon mining to give MPG (Multi-Purpose goo)? ------------------------ Peace through superior firepower: a guiding principle for uncertain times. |
Rhaegor Stormborn
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:18:00 -
[48]
I love you CCP Greyscale. I am very happy with CCP's thoughts on null sec as they almost exactly mirror my own, many of which I have been thinking for years now. Awesome blog. I am so excited for Eve and this expansion. Click Me! |
SyntaxPD
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:19:00 -
[49]
I don't care about t2 economy. It's already broken by bpo holders.
|
Judith Baker
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:19:00 -
[50]
Sounds interesting. Hopefully smaller alliances won't have to suck **** to get space of their own. I like the idea.
|
|
teji
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:21:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Melos Tellemey Please read the end bit.
Those aren't details.
|
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:21:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Melos Tellemey It's entire purpose is to help is understand the logic behind the changes, and Why it is changing.
The question remains: who cares? Some pilots would like to get ready and prepared for whatever change may come. Here comes a dev blog supposedely dealing with the issues and giving some answers... only it gives us absolutely nothing just more guessing games and speculation. Ergo: worthless fail blog.
|
Bilbo II
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:23:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Judith Baker Sounds interesting. Hopefully smaller alliances won't have to suck **** to get space of their own. I like the idea.
Nope, we will let you take all the space you want,get it upgraded to the max,then we will take it away from you or make you pay rent.
Why some people think that playing a mmog without alot of friends will ever work is beyond me.
Small entity causing the occasional problem sure, but HOLD anything that those with friends want? Never, or at least not for long.
|
eLDST0RM
Jazz Associates
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:26:00 -
[54]
I agree with Rhaegor's comments.
It does sound like you've genuinely understood what the problems (as I see them) are with 0.0.
There should be a place for groups of a few 100 people and money making devolved towards the people who are there, online and doing stuff. Not just moons converting isotopes into isk while you sleep.
Please don't stuff it up by being too half-hearted on these changes.
|
Sophie Daigneau
CAPITAL Assistance in Destruction Society GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:26:00 -
[55]
My 5's, all my 5's. This is probably the best devblog I've ever read. Explaining a new mechanic is nice, bearing your soul for the world is priceless.
|
Sewell
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:26:00 -
[56]
I really like how they think. Now back to waiting for the devblogs explaining the how.
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange µons, even death may die. |
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:28:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Bilbo II Nope, we will let you take all the space you want,get it upgraded to the max,then we will take it away from you or make you pay rent.
Shhh, don't spoil the surprise! Can't you see CCP is not playing the game, so cannot foresee any such 'spolits'?
|
Judith Baker
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:29:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Bilbo II
Originally by: Judith Baker Sounds interesting. Hopefully smaller alliances won't have to suck **** to get space of their own. I like the idea.
Nope, we will let you take all the space you want,get it upgraded to the max,then we will take it away from you or make you pay rent.
Why some people think that playing a mmog without alot of friends will ever work is beyond me.
Small entity causing the occasional problem sure, but HOLD anything that those with friends want? Never, or at least not for long.
I know right?
|
Professor Dumbledore
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:29:00 -
[59]
so you want people exploiting chinese ratters as their primary source of income? man you guys are insane.
|
Refazed
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 23:30:00 -
[60]
very nice devblog. I like where this is going and seems like the vision is to create a balanced environment.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |