Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 18:40:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Lady Ayeipsia All the more proof that thier industry is geared more towards combat ship building and supplying those ships to thier combat groups instead of building their own stations. Sorry, just playing Devil's Advocate. Honestly, to me it makes sense that they wouldn't have as many of their own stations, but obviously others have a difference of opinion.
Could be. Contact me in game though and Ill show you some of these model's. They are breath-taking. I wish CCP would give them to their rightful owners.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 18:52:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Eventy One Edited by: Eventy One on 10/08/2010 18:22:07
Originally by: Professor Tarantula That has nothing to do with it being "long overdue" instead of the most important thing ever. You're really reaching here.
There's room for disagreement. Some personal preference is possible. So rockets aren't on top of YOUR list of things CCP hasn't fixed but could have (that you'd liked fixed, but can live if they aren't) - that's cool.
What is at the top of your list? Or what IS your list?
My 'list' doesn't include any ships or modules. There's always going to be weak things and strong things in MMOs, no way around it. Many people demand CCP halt everything to improve a ship or something they like, but that kind of thinking isn't really about improving the game for everyone.
I agree with everything else the OP mentioned, just thought bringing the "OMG FIX RAWKETS" thing into it took away from all the good points.
My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 19:00:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Eventy One
Could be. Contact me in game though and Ill show you some of these model's. They are breath-taking. I wish CCP would give them to their rightful owners.
Its also a shame really that Alliances are resitricted to only the one races outpost model when building a station, from all the awesome looking models that are in empire. -
|
Stick Cult
Unspoken Autonomy.
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 19:01:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
Originally by: Eventy One
Could be. Contact me in game though and Ill show you some of these model's. They are breath-taking. I wish CCP would give them to their rightful owners.
Its also a shame really that Alliances are resitricted to only the one races outpost model when building a station, from all the awesome looking models that are in empire.
Why would a large empire give you it's blueprints for it's outposts? Tbh, I think the nullsec outposts look cooler than most empire stations.
Originally by: CCP Tuxford my bad. Rest assured I'm being ridiculed by my co-workers.
|
Apollo Gabriel
Domini Lex Talionis Etherium Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 20:55:00 -
[35]
bumping a good thread. ************************************************** * Don't let the Trolls keep you from your goals. * ************************************************** |
Darth Vapour
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 20:57:00 -
[36]
Electronic Attack Frigates that have a significantly shorter locking range then their T1 counterparts. No wonder they are used less then supercarriers.
|
Frisky Minx
KaaiiNet Holding Executor Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 22:40:00 -
[37]
11) Whining
|
Sarina Berghil
Minmatar New Zion Judge Advocate
|
Posted - 2010.08.10 23:54:00 -
[38]
1. Working organisational tools for Corporations and Alliances, giving the multiplayer aspect a boost. This involves elements like roles, wallet divisions, hangar divisions, eve-mail. It's way to cumbersome at the moment.
2. Better objectives for pvp that are tied in with the game world in all security classes. FW is just one example. If done correctly this could also be a workaround for some of the lag issues, and reduce blobbing.
3. User interface, user interface, user interface. Did I say user interface?
4. Balancing. Ships, modules, market items, missions, complexes - there's lots of features that seems out of place due to balance issues.
5. PvE that focuses on a multiplayer angle. Sleepers was a good start, and fortunately it seems they are working on this in other areas.
6. Simplifications of some of the laws and regulations governing pvp in hi-sec and low-sec. You need to have a lawyer present to determine whether or not there will be a concord response sometimes.
7. Less lock-in due to standing and security status. We need some options to switch between play styles a bit.
8. Tuning of the scanning system. Currently its too fast paced and with too little thought. A combination of slightly longer scan times, with slightly stronger probes might be an idea. Oh and make it so that it doesn't physically hurt to move probes.
9. More cake.
10. More beer.
(I could only think of 8 items) ;)
Oh and I love Eve too.
|
Eventy One
Magellan Exploration and Survey Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2010.08.11 18:43:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Frisky Minx
11) Whining
Not within CCP's power to fix.
|
Martin LufferKing
|
Posted - 2010.08.11 19:22:00 -
[40]
I'd add specialty missles (FoFs and Defenders).
Both offer and excellent chance to expand combat, particularily defenders. Imagine if you could defend your fleet with defenders (of course, some anti-turrent active defense weapons would be cool too). Hell Imo defenses that take up high slots would have been a better idea than the HP buff they did a few years back, would have made pilots trade something for the tougher ships (high slots).
|
|
Jaghatie Khan
|
Posted - 2010.08.11 19:24:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Jaghatie Khan on 11/08/2010 19:25:27
Originally by: Sarina Berghil
2. Better objectives for pvp that are tied in with the game world in all security classes. FW is just one example. If done correctly this could also be a workaround for some of the lag issues, and reduce blobbing.
Amen, like for instance, a mechanic bestowing an advantage in FW for hitting multiple systems in a constelation with small gangs at the same time. Discourages offensive blobbing while potentially (if done right) discouraging defensive blobbing as well.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |