Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 40 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3527
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 10:38:00 -
[481] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:The people making 2T ISK/week are technetium miners you need 700 tech moons to have that much income in a week and I'm pretty sure there are far less than 700 tech moons there's 350-400.
edit: argh |
Darek Castigatus
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
91
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 10:39:00 -
[482] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:CCP Goliath wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Goliath wrote: I have read a lot of you posting that you are not a fan, and a lot of people repeatedly posting to disagree with you. Other posters uniquely agreeing or disagreeing may have gotten lost in the throng, but I for one (as a stakeholder of the team) am a firm believer in the direction the team is heading in. SP and stakeholders are in every sprint review that the team holds and ask critical questions in those reviews. Note that I am not dismissing anyones feedback out of hand, just stating my personal preference.
Well try this as a mental excercise. Skip all my posts in this thread. Also skip all Goon/Test/Nullsec posts and anyone specifically trolling my posts etc. The reason being we're specifically involved in the issue and invested in the outcome. Then take a serious look at what the genuine neutrals are saying and see if you think its generally supportive of the 1.1 changes or opposed. There are issues that many people are criticising (and have indeed been criticising since before inferno) I've just been back reading some of the threads when Soniclover initially laid Superfriends plans for wardecs. Back then I wasn't even posting in the threads but these issues were still continually raised and negative feedback given. So please try it. Skip my posts, Skip the large alliance posts. Read what everyone else is saying. That's not even a mental exercise. That would take me a very large chunk of my afternoon at a time when I am pretty darn busy. The reason it would take so long is that you and others continually reposted the same arguments despite me asking you all not to - for this exact reason! In any case, I have explained that I have faith in the team to do the right thing, and they *have* read the feedback. I guess on our part it's an exercise in futility then. You state you haven't noticed peoples complaints or suggestions amongst the goon/jade spam/drama/whatever and then flat out state you won't bother looking and instead are going to just blindly push forward with flawed mechanics just because you've already got momentum. As for people reposting the same arguments ... shouldn't that give a bit more weight to them - it's one thing if a single character makes some random statements, but if it's echoed by a lot of people maybe it should be given a bit more consideration? Honestly, the kind of responses I've seen from CCP over this crap is very disheartening, as it seems as though you're all very reluctant to reconsider the 1.1 decisions (which feel as though they were rushed to begin with)
Or you could actually read what screegs wrote and realise theyre ignoring people whos attempts at persuasion involve spamming the same **** over and over and over. Give them some feedback thats actually worth reading and they'll take it on board. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3527
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 10:39:00 -
[483] - Quote
Nikon Nip wrote: Which is exactly what has happened, only the Goons thought we would just bend over and take the abuse. Oh how wrong they were.
you are, and will continue to do so
meanwhile our unwardeccable npc alt freighters will continue to supply us and bring our tech to jita
have fun! |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1352
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 11:07:00 -
[484] - Quote
Nikon Nip wrote:I honestly think the goons are scared, scared that their highsec logistic alts will get shut into a station, scared of their moon goo shipments getting repeatedly ambushed, scared that all the carebears, they have spent the last several year terrorizing, have finally said enough is enough. I'm sure when this started they had no idea that we carebears actually had some teeth, that we would band together and fight back. This war stopped being about Goonswarm v Jade a while ago, now it is Goonswarm v Highsec and they don't like it. Can you show a) Any such mention of this, ever? b) Any of these "ambushes"? (hint: neutral alts hurr hurr) c) Highsec "standing together" Hint: corps who declared war on everyone don't count - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1352
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 11:09:00 -
[485] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Two step wrote:I agree that wardecs should be risky, but the risk should depend on the target actually expending some time and effort, not just clicking yes to a pile of free ally requests that come in. Basically there needs to be some costs or limits to allies so that a defender actually needs to choose which allies they invite into a war. Without that cost/limit, it will just be abused as a way to get cheap(er) wardecs against people that would normally be expensive to declare war on, which is clearly not what was intended. Wardecs should be risky, but all the risk should be on the defender's side? WTF? You want to be a flaccid-phallus and wardec corps in hisec, then you want the poor fools you're wardeccing to stump the costs for defending a war they didn't want? If wars are supposed to be risky, the defender should at the very least be allowed free allies up to the point that the defending team outnumbers the attacking team. Making a war mutual should not preclude the defenders having allies. You started the war, you wear the cost. The defender goes mutual, you're stuck in the war that you started. That's your risk. Please listen to this player CCP ... she gets it! Giant self-confessed carebear is on your side, and this is evidence your change is balanced and reasonable?
Heh.
Jade, your proposal has been shot down in countless threads already. Why do you insist that this hasn't happened? Do you enjoy having these posts linked and then leaving the thread until it's off the first page? - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium
1543
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 11:11:00 -
[486] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:The people making 2T ISK/week are technetium miners you need 700 tech moons to have that much income in a week and I'm pretty sure there are far less than 700 tech moons
Thank you for showing that not even technetium miners can afford to have as many allies as the new wardec system provides for (yes, I'm aware that they are large alliances which wouldn't need allies if some hisec immensely space-rich person wanted to burn 500M ISK/week wardeccing people who don't care about wardecs). The design has not been thought through. The consequences of these design decisions have not been considered.
I would like to see a statement of the goals for the system, beyond just "enabling the mercenary market". I don't give a damn about the mercenary market: they've done well enough for themselves so far, and there's no reason for CCP to stick their fingers in that pie. If the wardec system happens to be useful to them, well and good. But the wardec system should not be designed with only the goal of enabling mercenaries in mind.
I have posted elsewhere about sensible ideas for the future of wardecs, beyond simply being a licence to grief smaller groups of players out of the game: make wardecs objective based (the main one I can think of is "remove this POS", another could be, "cause X ISK damage while taking less than Y ISK damage", or "prevent this corp mining in this constellation"). Then put some money as a wager on the outcome of this wardec.
So rather than simply paying a bribe to CONCORD, the aggressor is also making a challenge to the victim: defend your POS, win 1B ISK. If you want fights, you'll pay for them.
Wardecs will still be viable as a griefing mechanism: you can even motivate your targets to log in and get blown up by challenging them to blow up more than Y ISK worth of your ships with a nice kitty on the table.
Day 0 advice for new players: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=77176 |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1352
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 11:37:00 -
[487] - Quote
So, if I want to wardec Jade and his band of buddies for making up endless conspiracy theories about me, I'm not allowed to?
Your proposal is very silly, because trying to artificially give conditions for war in a sandbox is the complete antithesis of what fighting in a sandbox actually is.
It's nothing more than a thinly veiled request for protection, which we know is your MO.
Your proposal would be *perfectly good gameplay* in something like Star Trek online, or World of Tanks, or anything else which sets up the battles and scenarios for you, but not EvE.
If I want to take a meta 0 fit Rifter and wardec you forever I should be able to do this. If your corp/alliance can't find a way to defend against it then that's really your problem. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Lady Boon
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 12:07:00 -
[488] - Quote
I read most posts on this thread and I still don't understand CCPs logic of charging by the ally.
If I've understood correctly, the reasons for the changes are to boost the Merc profession and cap the number of corps that can sign up to ally with a decced corp.
How does charging corps extra to add allies help the Merc profession? Don't you need to limit the supply of allies to adjust the value of an ally (economics 101)?
There is a huge diversity of Alliances, Corps, and play styles in Eve, and this change seems to focus protecting a narrow (yet powerful) section of the player base. This change doesn't do anything to improve the game of Eve. I would have thought it would be better to boost the smaller alliances and corps to create more variety in the Eve Universe.
1) There should be risks and consequences to declaring war on someone. 2) Defenders should be able to call for allies from across New Eden. Make the market determine the availability of suitable allies 3) Allying yourself with a defender should confer it's own risk and reward, thereby limiting the number of potential allies.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3529
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 12:23:00 -
[489] - Quote
Lady Boon wrote: How does charging corps extra to add allies help the Merc profession? Don't you need to limit the supply of allies to adjust the value of an ally (economics 101)?
You failed economics 101.
If you only have a limited number of ally slots, you must pick the most effective allies for those slots. 5 random trash alliances is a poor use of your scarce resources (ally slots): instead you will want the actually effective corporations. |
Lady Boon
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 12:42:00 -
[490] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Lady Boon wrote: How does charging corps extra to add allies help the Merc profession? Don't you need to limit the supply of allies to adjust the value of an ally (economics 101)?
You failed economics 101. If you only have a limited number of ally slots, you must pick the most effective allies for those slots. 5 random trash alliances is a poor use of your scarce resources (ally slots): instead you will want the actually effective corporations.
Actually I passed.
Limiting the number of ally slots reduces the elasticity of demand, this stifles the Merc market. |
|
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2629
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:08:00 -
[491] - Quote
Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
264
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:09:00 -
[492] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay
take all my likes, this makes up for a lot of avocado spoiled burgers |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3537
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:27:00 -
[493] - Quote
Lady Boon wrote:Actually I passed.
Limiting the number of ally slots reduces the elasticity of demand, this stifles the Merc market. that might be a legitimate criticism if the "merc market" was any sort of market currently, however it is not |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2377
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:31:00 -
[494] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay
Not even Eve online balancing discussions are worth skipping a nights sleep and a nice breakfast for.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2637
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:32:00 -
[495] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay Not even Eve online balancing discussions are worth skipping a nights sleep and a nice breakfast for.
phew! welcome back Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2377
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:35:00 -
[496] - Quote
CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay Not even Eve online balancing discussions are worth skipping a nights sleep and a nice breakfast for. phew! welcome back
Well I couldn't leave a nice lady alone with all those shocking goons now could I?
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3537
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:35:00 -
[497] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Lady Boon wrote:Actually I passed.
Limiting the number of ally slots reduces the elasticity of demand, this stifles the Merc market. that might be a legitimate criticism if the "merc market" was any sort of market currently, however it is not to elaborate by creating scarcity you create economic behavior with regard to that scarcity and create the seeds of a market
currently, as there is no scarcity of any resource there is no economic activity of any kind |
Marak Noir
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:55:00 -
[498] - Quote
It's sad to see the Dev posts reduced to facetious comments. As a player, I always expect a forum thread with Dev posts to contain something interesting or useful.
As far as I can gather, Inferno is all about 'war' and making Mercenaries a valid profession in Eve. Why? It's a sandbox. If the game needs them, they will be available.
From a personal point of view it would be better to make the mechanics of Mercenary/Employer easier to use. Mercenaries need prospective Employers to post objectives and durations of contract on a suitable War Board. Employers need to be able to pick and choose Mercenary groups by looking at their accomplishments on the same board. Then just let them get on with it.
The 'dogpiling' of Allies sounded wonderful fun - just what the game needed to spice up highsec and make anyone declaring war think twice before pressing the button. Not everything Jade says is rubbish! |
|
CCP Punkturis
C C P C C P Alliance
2640
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 13:59:00 -
[499] - Quote
Marak Noir wrote:It's sad to see the Dev posts reduced to facetious comments. As a player, I always expect a forum thread with Dev posts to contain something interesting or useful.
I'm not a game designer so I have no real say in the mechanics but yesterday I was replying to Jade about his UI concerns (ally cost and what would happen to them when he has so many allies in his war) - so I'm being helpful too even though I don't have anything to say about what concerns you Gÿà EVE User Interface Programmer Gÿà GÖÑ Team Super Friends GÖÑ @CCP_Punkturis My Dev Blogs |
|
Molic Blackbird
Orion Faction Industries Orion Consortium
47
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 14:01:00 -
[500] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Lady Boon wrote: How does charging corps extra to add allies help the Merc profession? Don't you need to limit the supply of allies to adjust the value of an ally (economics 101)?
You failed economics 101. If you only have a limited number of ally slots, you must pick the most effective allies for those slots. 5 random trash alliances is a poor use of your scarce resources (ally slots): instead you will want the actually effective corporations.
I good merc corp is better then 100 random free corps. If defending corps wanted a good merc corp, they will pay for it. People will only pay for a merc corp if they have something to defend that they themselves would be unable to. That doesn't change because they are limited to a small handful of ally slots.
|
|
Arrgthepirate
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
37
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 14:09:00 -
[501] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Punkturis wrote:Jade hasn't posted in this thread for a few hours, I hope he's okay Not even Eve online balancing discussions are worth skipping a nights sleep and a nice breakfast for. phew! welcome back Well I couldn't leave a nice lady alone with all those shocking goons now could I?
What? You think we don't treat our wimmins right or something?! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2378
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 14:29:00 -
[502] - Quote
Marak Noir wrote:It's sad to see the Dev posts reduced to facetious comments. As a player, I always expect a forum thread with Dev posts to contain something interesting or useful.
As far as I can gather, Inferno is all about 'war' and making Mercenaries a valid profession in Eve. Why? It's a sandbox. If the game needs them, they will be available.
From a personal point of view it would be better to make the mechanics of Mercenary/Employer easier to use. Mercenaries need prospective Employers to post objectives and durations of contract on a suitable War Board. Employers need to be able to pick and choose Mercenary groups by looking at their accomplishments on the same board. Then just let them get on with it.
The 'dogpiling' of Allies sounded wonderful fun - just what the game needed to spice up highsec and make anyone declaring war think twice before pressing the button. Not everything Jade says is rubbish!
The real issue with the mercenary profession is that there is no gameplay reason to include them in defensive wars in the current state of the game and wardec mechanic - there is literally nothing that a merc can do to help you end an incoming war that cannot be accomplished without paying a penny (and this is even before Inferno 1.0).
If you get wardecced you move your logistics out of corp/alliance (as the goon posters here have boasted they do) - you limit your exposure, and you wait for the attacker to run out of money/patience or just prep for the occassional gank.
Prior to inferno my own alliance went through an intensely frustrating 15 month period of seeking a "good" hisec war but the same happened time after time, - logistics disappear, people move-away - use blueball tactics and general bore the attacker senseless.
What Inferno 1.0 delivered was not a "merc marketplace" (basically the wardec team delivered nothing in terms of adding value and consequence to wars) it was simply a "mayhem marketplace" where defenders could invite dogpiling onto attackers as a quid pro quo balancing to the closing of wardec evasion loopholes and increased large alliance wardec defense through size escalation.
So now the issue we have is trying ostensibly to "boost" a merc profession by removing the mayhem marketplace which destroys the balance reached on attack vs defense with Incarna 1.0/.
It doesn't help mercenary corporations in the slightest because nobody has a motivation to hire them. Why pay more than zero for a defensive ally when no defensive ally in the game is capable of bringing a war to a conclusion. The "scarcity" argument conjured up by some is just complete hogwash - an entity might wardec X small target and that target add the 5 largest alliances in the game to their defensive war for a total of 20,000 players and a total cost of 150m isk per 2 weeks. All they achieve is giving the attacker more free targets and ensuring they lose the baseline isk transaction war (50m vs 75m) while doing absolutely nothing to bring the war to a conclusion.
Until CCP is able to engineer a wardec system with stakes and consequences then there will be no purpose to mercs joining defensive wars except to scam/skim ISK payments from the credulous while doing precisely nothing to help "win" unwinnable wars.
If on the other hand Team Superfriends had delivered a stakes system for war (here's something I made up on the back of a beermat last night for example):
Wardec declared ... (Alliance X 5000) people (aliiance Y 1000 people.) Alliance X pays 200m per week (alliance Y to X would be 500m)
Default stake (defeat penality) = cost to wardec X vs Y + cost to wardec Y vs X x 10 = 7billion isk.
This stake would be paid out if one alliance gets a 75% isk killed efficiency on the other alliance while scoring at least 7b isk damage done (taken directly from the executor corp wallet or fixed as an automaticly collected "debt" if wallet insufficient. (entities in debt would no longer be able to declare war).
So in one move you'd have wars that risked something for both sides. Whichever alliance first scored 7b isk damage while being at least 75% ahead of the other would be judged to have "won" the war and has the option to take the victory boon,
Alternatively a victorious defender could "double down" perhaps and take over as the attacker for the next sequence while increasing the stake 2x to 14b isk (and skip the war fee thereafter) (rinse and repeat.)
It turns wars into hi stakes gambling and contests where both risk on the outcome.
Now.
Introduce this system and you can bet your ass that mercenary corps will have a role again because hiring them directly increases your chance of winning a hi-stakes empire war and collecting the victory boon. Allow mercs to be paid in hiring fee + futures (split of the victory take) and you suddenly make this an interesting game feature with genuine market.
In my example above I can see Alliance Y definitely wanting the service of a decent merc corp to help it win and collect the pot or reverse and double down as the new attacker.
***
Like I said, this is back of a beer mat proposal for how to make merc corps viable. But it involves actually producing a war system where victory and defeat matters and the participants are actually interested in winning.
But its what you need to make people care about merc corps in defensive wars.
The 1.1 patch just tries to promote mercs by nerfing mayhem and the outcome will just be less war involvement by everyone.
If Team Superfriends have decent metrics they can check in six months time we can revisit this prediction and see who is right and who is wrong on this. If warfare has exploded all over new eden and mercs are the new superstar professionals of eve I'll doubless eat some humble pie on the 1.1 change come christmas.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Lady Boon
Perkone Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 14:30:00 -
[503] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Weaselior wrote:Lady Boon wrote:Actually I passed.
Limiting the number of ally slots reduces the elasticity of demand, this stifles the Merc market. that might be a legitimate criticism if the "merc market" was any sort of market currently, however it is not to elaborate by creating scarcity you create economic behavior with regard to that scarcity and create the seeds of a market currently, as there is no scarcity of any resource there is no economic activity of any kind
We're in agreement there, since potential allies a not in limited supply, there is little reason to hire Mercs, hence no market.
Where we disagree is in the mechanism that CCP have chosen to limit the supply of allies. |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
79
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 15:40:00 -
[504] - Quote
Darek Castigatus wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:CCP Goliath wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:CCP Goliath wrote: I have read a lot of you posting that you are not a fan, and a lot of people repeatedly posting to disagree with you. Other posters uniquely agreeing or disagreeing may have gotten lost in the throng, but I for one (as a stakeholder of the team) am a firm believer in the direction the team is heading in. SP and stakeholders are in every sprint review that the team holds and ask critical questions in those reviews. Note that I am not dismissing anyones feedback out of hand, just stating my personal preference.
Well try this as a mental excercise. Skip all my posts in this thread. Also skip all Goon/Test/Nullsec posts and anyone specifically trolling my posts etc. The reason being we're specifically involved in the issue and invested in the outcome. Then take a serious look at what the genuine neutrals are saying and see if you think its generally supportive of the 1.1 changes or opposed. There are issues that many people are criticising (and have indeed been criticising since before inferno) I've just been back reading some of the threads when Soniclover initially laid Superfriends plans for wardecs. Back then I wasn't even posting in the threads but these issues were still continually raised and negative feedback given. So please try it. Skip my posts, Skip the large alliance posts. Read what everyone else is saying. That's not even a mental exercise. That would take me a very large chunk of my afternoon at a time when I am pretty darn busy. The reason it would take so long is that you and others continually reposted the same arguments despite me asking you all not to - for this exact reason! In any case, I have explained that I have faith in the team to do the right thing, and they *have* read the feedback. I guess on our part it's an exercise in futility then. You state you haven't noticed peoples complaints or suggestions amongst the goon/jade spam/drama/whatever and then flat out state you won't bother looking and instead are going to just blindly push forward with flawed mechanics just because you've already got momentum. As for people reposting the same arguments ... shouldn't that give a bit more weight to them - it's one thing if a single character makes some random statements, but if it's echoed by a lot of people maybe it should be given a bit more consideration? Honestly, the kind of responses I've seen from CCP over this crap is very disheartening, as it seems as though you're all very reluctant to reconsider the 1.1 decisions (which feel as though they were rushed to begin with) Or you could actually read what screegs wrote and realise theyre ignoring people whos attempts at persuasion involve spamming the same **** over and over and over. Give them some feedback thats actually worth reading and they'll take it on board.
The way you describe it makes it sound quite a lot like "if we don't like it, then it was worthless feedback to begin with!". I hope your post isn't an accurate portrayel of any sentiments CCP/the csm have.
|
Jake McCord
Greater Metropolis Sanitation Service Barbarian Wine and Cheese Society
35
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 15:45:00 -
[505] - Quote
Frankly, this last change to the wardec system SUCKS. Between this and the unified inventory system, I'm ready to move to Star Trek Online.
Just because someone cried about all the allies their enemy brought on. too bad huh. They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That's the Chicago way! Did I mention, I used to live in Chicago? |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
83
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 15:55:00 -
[506] - Quote
Anyway, on the subject of mercs, bouncing the mechanics between being skewed in favour of aggressors or defenders doesn't stimulate merc gameplay. If you skew it in favour of defenders they don't need mercs, if you skew it in favour of aggressors then the majority of poor/small defending corps will do what they always have: dock up, use out of corp alts and wait it out.
Mercs shine when it comes to specific tasks like defending a tower thats coming out of reinforced, knocking over an enemies tower, etc. Certain 'goals' or mechanics that mercs specifically would excell at (more than just being extra bodies, or camping hubs) should be the focus. I don't think limiting or otherwise messing with "normal" allies will successfully steer people towards using mercs. |
Nikon Nip
Node Alpha Defense Research
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 17:15:00 -
[507] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Nikon Nip wrote: Which is exactly what has happened, only the Goons thought we would just bend over and take the abuse. Oh how wrong they were.
you are, and will continue to do so meanwhile our unwardeccable npc alt freighters will continue to supply us and bring our tech to jita have fun!
So, if I understand this correctly, you ARE afraid of wardecs and do care about them, otherwise you wouldn't need to hide in the npc corps. Interesting, another admission of fear direct from a goon. |
Nikon Nip
Node Alpha Defense Research
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 17:20:00 -
[508] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote: You know the hilarious thing in all of this is the ONLY entities that *can* fight a war (if they chose to do so) with unlimited and free allies IS ******* Goonswarm/TEST. .
So your saying that the game HAS been rigged to give the advantage to Test/Goons? |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3544
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 18:09:00 -
[509] - Quote
Nikon Nip wrote: So, if I understand this correctly, you ARE afraid of wardecs and do care about them, otherwise you wouldn't need to hide in the npc corps. Interesting, another admission of fear direct from a goon.
this is one of those things that's so stupid it's actually difficult to respond to because to focus on just one of the stupid things lets the other ones slip through
you cannot threaten us with wardecs, because like anyone with brains larger than a snail, we do our shipping in npc corps. a freighter is not a combat ship: it cannot do damage and so its only recourse is to avoid combat, so naturally we do so. given the choice of screening a freighter with a fleet or simply dropping it into an npc corp naturally we'll take the easy road because who wants to put in effort moving a space truck
we have nothing to actually fear from a collection of highseccers with little more brains than a turnip because we know how to play this game and therefore know that the method they're trying to threaten us with simply doesn't work
so we laugh about the idea that we're actually threatened by having everyone in empire wardecced with goonswarm to the extent we'd batphone devs is so laughable that its almost suprising even jade believes it |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1352
|
Posted - 2012.06.20 19:43:00 -
[510] - Quote
Nikon Nip wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote: You know the hilarious thing in all of this is the ONLY entities that *can* fight a war (if they chose to do so) with unlimited and free allies IS ******* Goonswarm/TEST. .
So your saying that the game HAS been rigged to give the advantage to Test/Goons? Wow this is special.
So it's rigged if the current system favours them and it's rigged if the change favours them, and you just decide to flip a coin as to which that is? Surely the vector of change is the important thing, no? (whether it is moving to support them or hinder)
That's the worst logic I've seen in a thread in a long time, and that is really saying something. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 [17] 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |