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 - 0 post(s) |
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 11:03:00 -
[601]
Edited by: Kepakh on 02/03/2011 11:05:03
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Yet a lot (not yet majority, but getting there) think that bridges does more harm than good in the grand scheme of things.
Nope, on the grand scheme of the things it is more and more clear that those who cry for jump bridges removal are mostly those who do not own 0.0 space wanting to nerf the game of others to make it easier for them to reach the cake...
If I successfully fight for a space +40 jumps from Jita, it is fine that people who fought for their own space get tools to overcome extensive distances and so exploited riches as well as personal and corporate assets can be transported in reasonable fashion.
I understand it may make some gate huggers unhappy and I don't give a damn. They did not fight for the space they are camping. The idea that you put the alliance together, fight over a system and manage to keep it just in order to turn your space into 'piwat' enticement is ******ed.
|
newgurl
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 11:12:00 -
[602]
Originally by: Makumba Aki
JB let you travel very safetly through your own space. I would even say that it is more dagerous to travel through high sec. This makes big space holding alliances quite invulnerable against small gangs. It is a very simple argument.
No. it doesnĘt allow you to travel safely.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
In my opinion JBs should be removed and the Jump Drive of Capitals and Super Capitals should be removed (gate travel) or nerfed.
You must be completely stupid.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Because right now, the defending/attacking entity can defend/attack a target that comes out the RF, and be 15 minutes later in a completly different corner of the eve universe and attack/defend the next target. <-- Problem with force projection.
Remember you still have to get that fleet together. Just because you can get to a destination quickly doesnĘt mean that you will get there quickly.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
(no very safe JB routes anymore).
JB routes are not very safe.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
This was, and still is my argument. You now can try to present some valid counter-arguments or simply ignore it. But please stop to BS.
Can you stop your BS?
|
KaiDoh Maru
M'8'S
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 11:40:00 -
[603]
Originally by: Mishkaii It would make space big again, make logistics meaningful, and hot drops of thousands of ships no longer trivial. What is there not to like again?
Very supported.
Signed - We didn't have them back in the day (jump bridges) and 0.0 was fine - more than that it was dare I say it, fun. We actually had to travel around and you know, occasionally fight our way through 0.0
Do it CCP
|
Lise Kahel
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 11:51:00 -
[604]
CSM all owns carriers or simply lives in that 'do-not-bubble' area. Truth is, you will **** over so many 0.0 residents trying to make some ISK or simply get their stuff around. Powerblocks already have their titans jumping in fleets and freighters all over 0.0, they could care less.
People usually can't be bothered to light a cyno let alone do a few carrier jumps. You think putting more emphasis on logistics will make 0.0 more fun?
Or let me put this simply; 0.0 is barely PVP between blobs, now it's going to be no PVP, barely better than empire PVE, and griefing small people doing logistics.
|
Fouljin
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 12:23:00 -
[605]
While we at it, why not just remove all JB's and stargates from 0.0. Make some random unstable wormholes that link all 0.0 areas together randomly with occasional wormhole to lowsec / highsec. Also new module to titan or what ever, wormhole generator. Produces wormhole from 0.0 to anohter 0.0 system IF theres a special wormholecyno on the other end. Wormhole stays up for 15min and is bi-directional. and free to use for everyone. Also this wormhole is easily scannable or needs to be put near systems star. Also carrier is the largest ship that can move trough this hole. Rest of the jump capable ships stays as they are. Starmap stays as it is with all 0.0 stargates removed and routes removed.
That would mixup the bucket of tears and overhaul the null as we know it.
If you have to overhaul null, overkill it! or what ever. ( It's not that Im lazy, I just really don't care) Roses are #FF0000, Violets are ##0000FF, all my base are belong to you... |
Makumba Aki
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 13:03:00 -
[606]
Originally by: newgurl
Originally by: Makumba Aki
JB let you travel very safetly through your own space. I would even say that it is more dagerous to travel through high sec. This makes big space holding alliances quite invulnerable against small gangs. It is a very simple argument.
No. it doesnĘt allow you to travel safely.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
In my opinion JBs should be removed and the Jump Drive of Capitals and Super Capitals should be removed (gate travel) or nerfed.
You must be completely stupid.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Because right now, the defending/attacking entity can defend/attack a target that comes out the RF, and be 15 minutes later in a completly different corner of the eve universe and attack/defend the next target. <-- Problem with force projection.
Remember you still have to get that fleet together. Just because you can get to a destination quickly doesnĘt mean that you will get there quickly.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
(no very safe JB routes anymore).
JB routes are not very safe.
Originally by: Makumba Aki
This was, and still is my argument. You now can try to present some valid counter-arguments or simply ignore it. But please stop to BS.
Can you stop your BS?
These are your arguments? Really? So everytime I say something you will simply say: "No it is not true and you are stupid!" ?
|
TZeer
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 15:53:00 -
[607]
Originally by: TZeer Bridge madness Same madness, in another view.
Kill the bridges!
|
Demeter Prime
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 18:19:00 -
[608]
Originally by: TZeer
Originally by: TZeer Bridge madness Same madness, in another view.
Kill the bridges!
This!
Supported
|
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2011.03.02 19:26:00 -
[609]
Originally by: Demeter Prime
Originally by: TZeer
Originally by: TZeer Bridge madness Same madness, in another view. Kill the bridges!
This!
Supported
I am always shocked when players build sand castles in their sandbox game. So insolent...
|
bbtop
Triangular Initiative STR8NGE BREW
|
Posted - 2011.03.07 14:37:00 -
[610]
By the power of Greyskull, this is an amazing thing to read. Supported fully. +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1
|
|
Nerodia Crotalus
|
Posted - 2011.03.08 21:27:00 -
[611]
I'd like to suggest a nerf to the ability to include multiple quotes in forum replies.
It makes it way too easy for people to act like they're smarter than they really are and feel better about the fact that they're arguing over a video game.
How about only one quote per reply. Or one quote per page! Or maybe requiring an isk cost for every quote imbedded in your message. Or how about just allowing everyone to share the length of their d!cks in the interest of getting it over with.
Do this CCP, since I'm sure someone important is actually reading all of this...
|
Epyx Nykee
Dissident Aggressors Mordus Angels
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 00:14:00 -
[612]
Edited by: Epyx Nykee on 11/05/2011 00:16:11
Originally by: Biomass MeNOW
Originally by: Doctor Invictus Well, over in F&I I proposed a system where infrastructure like jump bridges (or jammers, etc) would only be available where sovereignty holders have made substantial long-term investments in a given area of space, and where the extent of functionality of a given type of infrastructure (e.g., range of jump bridge) would exist on a scale based on the extent of the development in the system.
I think this would make it possible to have jump bridges in the game without having their existence in every system being a given. They would be a relative luxury for the hubs in the system.
The problem with this is that, while the territory holder may have to put weeks or even months into working the infrastructure up to a given point, the enemy can laugh their way in, regardless of forces marshaled against them, and blast it to flinders in a couple of days.
The balance is hopelessly skewed toward the invader and lack of any sort of limit on the number of supercaps in a given system means that they can simply steamroll their way through system after system uncontested.
As for the 'bridge issue... for those of you railing against them, saying they're too easy and whatnot, have you seen what happens when a group of 5 bombers can do at a jump bridge? Even one bomber can create considerable havoc. Add in a light dictor with eyes on the other side of the bridge and you have an unescapable deathtrap. They're also insanely costly; billions a month to operate.
Yes a group of bombers can create havoc (Small Group), even a solo bomber ( Solo Bomber) But the fact remains that jump bridges have done nothing but help create nothing but carebears and blob warfare. When a fleet can just run to there jb and safely retreat several systems away at the slight hint of a loss or call in that insta blob of 100 pilots for a solo ship is just rediculous. 0.0 Has become nothing but a carebear land of blobs that cannot fight solo and rely on there 10v1 odds to win a fight. I myself cannot wait for the nerf.
|
Danika Princip
Minmatar Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 12:05:00 -
[613]
Originally by: Epyx Nykee Edited by: Epyx Nykee on 11/05/2011 00:16:11
Originally by: Biomass MeNOW
Originally by: Doctor Invictus Well, over in F&I I proposed a system where infrastructure like jump bridges (or jammers, etc) would only be available where sovereignty holders have made substantial long-term investments in a given area of space, and where the extent of functionality of a given type of infrastructure (e.g., range of jump bridge) would exist on a scale based on the extent of the development in the system.
I think this would make it possible to have jump bridges in the game without having their existence in every system being a given. They would be a relative luxury for the hubs in the system.
The problem with this is that, while the territory holder may have to put weeks or even months into working the infrastructure up to a given point, the enemy can laugh their way in, regardless of forces marshaled against them, and blast it to flinders in a couple of days.
The balance is hopelessly skewed toward the invader and lack of any sort of limit on the number of supercaps in a given system means that they can simply steamroll their way through system after system uncontested.
As for the 'bridge issue... for those of you railing against them, saying they're too easy and whatnot, have you seen what happens when a group of 5 bombers can do at a jump bridge? Even one bomber can create considerable havoc. Add in a light dictor with eyes on the other side of the bridge and you have an unescapable deathtrap. They're also insanely costly; billions a month to operate.
Yes a group of bombers can create havoc (Small Group), even a solo bomber ( Solo Bomber) But the fact remains that jump bridges have done nothing but help create nothing but carebears and blob warfare. When a fleet can just run to there jb and safely retreat several systems away at the slight hint of a loss or call in that insta blob of 100 pilots for a solo ship is just rediculous. 0.0 Has become nothing but a carebear land of blobs that cannot fight solo and rely on there 10v1 odds to win a fight. I myself cannot wait for the nerf.
I think you dropped some straw when you made that man.
|
deathpain
Gallente The Graduates
|
Posted - 2011.05.13 11:19:00 -
[614]
Edited by: deathpain on 13/05/2011 11:20:17 Does CCP even know what they want to do with null ? Because they have nerfed two things recently and then they are saying after they have done this then they are going to look at what there doing with null. This makes no sense at all, and then they also said that they want the industry in null sec to be able to keep up with the population. How are we supposed to do that when they nerf jump bridges, in which is vital to our logistics for industry. They really dont seem to know what they are doing, and say they want more people wanting to play in null where as they are making it less worth while being in null sec. Its starting to get to the point that you can make more isk running Level 4 missions rather then null sec ratting. And then there removing our logistics capabilities aswell ? And all this before they actually look at what they want to do with null. CSM please get CCP to look at what they are doing with this game, and how they are seriously affecting those in null, in which CCP say that they wish to help with updates. Fix things that dont work, dont break things that do....
|
Ecoskii
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 12:51:00 -
[615]
So another completely ignored thread for CCP - grats. I wonder if there is some form of award for Services to Industry for Ignoring Customer Feedback? Back up your half-baked ideas with consultation, support it with DATA, and provide intelligent responses to points raised. Until then, stop playing with stuff that you have demonstrated little understanding of.
|
Mr LaForge
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 13:11:00 -
[616]
Edited by: Mr LaForge on 15/05/2011 13:11:48 Supporting the un nerfing of JBs.
|
Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.15 17:41:00 -
[617]
Originally by: Dr Cheeto Edited by: Dr Cheeto on 15/01/2011 21:34:23 Edited by: Dr Cheeto on 15/01/2011 21:34:15 In addition to the legitimate concerns voiced above, this would be a massive buff to capitals and supercapitals, especially Titans. Essentially, an alliance with sufficient funds and high-SP pilots could just get a Titan to bridge subcapital ships on every operation of any importance. Meanwhile, the plebeians who have one or two Titans in their alliance may have to burn 30 jumps to get to where they need to go.
Additionally, the Supercarrier pilots can just give a hearty "lol subcaps" in local and jump out of system.
Rich, old alliances would have the difficulty of keeping their space empires running pretty much unchanged, while newer, poorer alliances would be screwed out of nullsec.
This would be a major step in bringing EVE Online closer to Supercaps Online, and it is exceedingly odd that it was considered seriously, as the minutes show that the CSM discussed the Supercapital hotdrop as being more-or-less a "win" button in nullsec engagements right before discussing why jump bridges should be removed.
There is a well known workaround to this. Jew some isk buy a high sp toon and supercap. ________________________________________________
|
n4d444
Solar Nexus. -Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2011.05.20 06:38:00 -
[618]
If ccp plans to boost 0.0 industry and/or nerf high sec industry so we dont depend on Jita for everything in 0.0 then this change makes perfect sense.
If you just keep nefring 0.0 people will simply go to empire, run missions there (or other isk making activites) and clone jump back to 0.0 to have some fun. To some people this makes perfect sense it just eludes me.
|
|
|
|
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 |