Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Miso Hawnee
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:54:00 -
[1171]
Originally by: Blade Wolling One more reason to stay out of Null sec. Create more player interaction? Sure, but only PvP. Friendly player interaction does not occur in Null sec. Go into a system to try to make new friends? No, you get podded instead. Too many players are more interested in ganging up on lesser experienced players than forming new alliances.
Is somebody from Violence INC complaining about...violence? LOL
|
Shurikane
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:57:00 -
[1172]
Quote: Are there enough incentives for conflict/pvp outside sov?
Nope, and it's what basically drove me off 0.0.
It wasn't that nullsec was easy. It was that finding trouble was a massive PITA. Roaming ops were four hours of incredible boredom in which we obliterated the odd frigate or two that didn't pay attention, but otherwise any rival gang we encountered, we actively ran away from, or they ran away from us. There wasn't any incentive for two gangs to fight each other unless going for sov.
And even then, going for sov meant that you were in four hours of boredom in a bigger ship since often the opposite alliance didn't find enough people to counter your current fleet, so they just let you do whatever you wanted.
0.0 pretty much meant this:
- Mining/ratting all day
- Participating in the mandatory ice ops
- Resisting the temptation to dock up when the cloaky alt of the week invaded the system
- Idly browsing the Internet only to realize the place has become exactly like the Steam Forums. For the record, this is not a good thing
I don't see the point of going to lawless space if nobody's gonna kill each other there.
|
s73v3n2k
Caldari UK Corp -Mostly Harmless-
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:57:00 -
[1173]
Edited by: s73v3n2k on 11/05/2011 06:05:23 Edited by: s73v3n2k on 11/05/2011 06:04:04 CCP soundwave plays the game as roaming griefer and has said this before. The way i see it is he is looking at his playing style and molding the game so suit it.
They are making it harder for the people that control, pay for and work hard to keep 0.0 space so the people who do next to nothing for their gaming experience can have more fun.
How about they do something about small gangs that just log off when they want to avoid fights or things get too hot. Or cloaky gangs that just hide or sit in systems 23/7 to get kills with minimum effort.
If you want to change 0.0 consult those in 0.0. Listen to the people who use the mechanics not the high sec players who have never used them.
Stop making changes on what seems like a whim just to see what happens - The anomalies for example.
If EVE had any decent competition in the games market then I don't think you would have been announcing your 8th birthday this year but most likely the closure of your servers.
|
Laser Purification
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:58:00 -
[1174]
Edited by: Laser Purification on 11/05/2011 05:59:16
Originally by: Fix Lag THANKS FOR BALANCING SUPERCAPITALS
ALSO, THANK YOU FOR DECIDING TWO AND A HALF YEARS AFTER DOMINION THAT MAYBE SOVEREIGN NULLSEC NEEDS ANOTHER BUNCH OF ****ING NERFS AND ****-UPS TO GO WITH THAT EXPANSION
I swear to God you people could not suck any more at game designing if you actually tried.
Quoted for extreme truth... doing this as an isolated change is both a bad idea and misses the point.
But since soundwave is basically saying "PVP is more gate ganks" rather than being concerned about actual Sovereignty mechanics I guess it makes warped sense. Though I sort of thought small gang roaming was what low-sec was for.
|
Widemouth Deepthroat
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:58:00 -
[1175]
I'm getting very moist thinking about all the crevices I'm gonna widen in NC space once these changes go through! Been waiting for a long time for these changes!!!! :D :D
ps: I never wear condom for you NC :D
|
Lev Aeris
United Amarr Templar Legion Fidelas Constans
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 05:58:00 -
[1176]
Originally by: s73v3n2k CCP soundwave plays the game as roaming griefer and has said this before. The way i see it is he is looking at his playing style and molding the game so suit it.
They are making it harder for the people that control, pay for and work hard to keep 0.0 space so the people who do next to nothing for their gaming experience can have more fun.
How about they do something about small gangs that just log off when they want to avoid fights or things get too hot. Or cloaky gangs that just hide or sit in systems 23/7 to get kills with minimum effort.
I would love it if ships never disappeared from space. Either get to safe harbor or risk death. That would be awesome.
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:01:00 -
[1177]
Edited by: Rumpelstilski on 11/05/2011 06:03:09
Originally by: Guyver Kalithdor There is two groups of 0.0 players posting here. There is every 0.0 player that is ****ed about this bull**** change, and there is Pandemic Legion trolling the rest of us. PL holds 1 system and that NOL-M9. (check your eve ingame map) PL was paid and ships bought for by russian botters who not only bot but were caught real money trading..
It's not a big secret... It's the white elephant in the room.. CCP banned a lot of them, still barly scratched the surface.
PL (who BTW has a very large Super capital fleet) will not be affected by this. Not only do they hold no space, but they were given money and super caps by other players breaking all of CCP rules. (Awesome job CCP)
But even PL, if they were being honest and not just trying to troll everyone, would admit this is a bad idea.
Since most PL makes isk by doing sanctums on NC alts, I can say that PL will be affected as everyone will, also, I'd say that 0.0 is and will be quite profitable otherwise people (including PL) wouldn't bother joining the NC.
Originally by: Blade Wolling One more reason to stay out of Null sec. Create more player interaction? Sure, but only PvP. Friendly player interaction does not occur in Null sec. Go into a system to try to make new friends? No, you get podded instead. Too many players are more interested in ganging up on lesser experienced players than forming new alliances.
Considering the whole of nullsec is composed of three entities all blued up within and occasionally blued up to each other, I find this comment quite insane.
|
Lojik
Priory of Empire SpaceMonkey's Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:02:00 -
[1178]
IF this happens, then CPP needs to nerf Titan brigdes as well. Basically, if a system is Cyno jammed, NO CYNO SHOULD BLOODY WELL BE ABLE TO BE LIT!
|
PapaTramp
VLADIVOSTOK Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:04:00 -
[1179]
The most dangerous idiot is the initiative idiot. The following logical step is an exit from bridge to randomly choosen system. CCP, dismiss this idiot.
|
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:06:00 -
[1180]
Originally by: Lojik IF this happens, then CPP needs to nerf Titan brigdes as well. Basically, if a system is Cyno jammed, NO CYNO SHOULD BLOODY WELL BE ABLE TO BE LIT!
Are you saying that a titan can bridge people to a cyno jammed system? Or are you getting a little Black Ops butt hurt right now while in your cyno jammed system? If you are saying that a titan can bridge to a cyno jammed system then your a noob and need to go back to empire.
|
|
Untelo1
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:10:00 -
[1181]
Don't be fooled by the dumb grunts' complaints and emo rage. This is a good change, but it won't fix 0.0 alone. I agree that 0.0 is too safe right now, and it still will be after this change. But like so many people in this thread have said, the rewards should be proportional to the risks. Big part of nullsec's rewards are in moon goo, which is never seen by the average player. I don't oppose the anomaly change either, with that any sov space could generate loads of isk in NPC bounties. Instead in my opinion the number of valuable systems should be increased and distributed evenly. Same applies to the bottleneck moon goos of course. Obviously a big problem with 0.0 at the moment is the enormous power blocs. Like you, CCP have pointed out, 0.0 should rather be in the hands of many small alliances. But what allows the power blocs to hold their massive empires together? For NC it has been their sheer numbers, but that might not be enough much longer. For DRF it's the ISK from the hundreds of bots running in the Dronelands and as we've seen lately, their supercap blobs. What i think should be done about this all, is find ways to keep those power blocs from forming. A solution, as much as it may be disapproved of, would be to make sov costs exponential to the amount of systems an alliance holds, removal of standings and somehow seriously crippling supercaps. These are quite obviously too dramatic changes for CCP to have balls to make, and only serve as examples.
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Unknown Soldiers Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:16:00 -
[1182]
Quote:
Let's balance the books a little. If conquerable space has to become even more open to NPC-space based gankers, give us the recourse to hit them back. Let use disable NPC 0.0 station services.
This is one of the better ideas Ive read here. Make NPC station services destructible(and repairable) or possible to neutralize for a time.
As for the original threadnaught topic, I don't think this is as big change as people think, having lived in null without bridges or other goods, life doesn't change that much. What changes is that small fleets take longer to reach the fight, meaning less participation in fights. Less small-scale pvp. In large-scale warfare, fleet mobilization is done by titan bridges which is unaffected. Sorry guys, nothing changes much in areas that you hope. Apart that this again makes life harder for the average Joe living in null. Not that much even. Logistics doesnt actually increase much, as same amount of poses are used, they just dont reside in same system anymore.
This change improving pvp? Hah. Some cloaky tengu killing some industrials hauling pos fuel isn't pvp in my opinion. Making defense of space harder, I dont think that has the effect that you think.
What disturbs me is how CCP continues to think that life in null can be made 'better' by nerfs nerfs nerfs and more nerfs. It disturbs me that you give one week of time for alliances to act on this. Does it make you hard, making hundreds of people jump through hoops for you? Do you think this is good customer relationship? Im starting to think that CCP is biased again. Your predictions about how these changes affect null disturb me. I recommend you actually start asking players what they think.
Why don't you nerf highsec for a change, hmm?
|
Feyleaf
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:20:00 -
[1183]
Edited by: Feyleaf on 11/05/2011 06:21:34 7 days!!! are you guys all on coke or something?.. most of our logistics team is not.
No point in only 7 days notice unless theres an alternative agenda. you guys have a bad history of dev's with alternative agendas so im not just talking out of my ass.
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:21:00 -
[1184]
Originally by: Zey Nadar
Quote:
Let's balance the books a little. If conquerable space has to become even more open to NPC-space based gankers, give us the recourse to hit them back. Let use disable NPC 0.0 station services.
This is one of the better ideas Ive read here. Make NPC station services destructible(and repairable) or possible to neutralize for a time.
I'd be willing to approve of this if it were possible to make PC stations free ports once you break their shield into the first rf cycle, that way people would actually bother to respond before the last timer.
Originally by: Zey Nadar What changes is that small fleets take longer to reach the fight, meaning less participation in fights. Less small-scale pvp
This part of your reasoning is flawed. If a small gang bothered to jump gazillion jumps into your space without jump bridges you have more chance of having a fight if you don't immediately converge with a 100-men home defense gang perfectly fitted to counter the said small gang.
|
Louanne Barros
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:22:00 -
[1185]
Huzzah!
One bridge per system sounds pretty reasonable to me.
|
Calandari
Retribution. Inc. R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:25:00 -
[1186]
Are you kidding me .... who is ccp working with .... sounds like they are in bed with the ruskies .... oooo buddy.
Really ccp has no f-ing clue how the game is played. Hey GM's Jump into a ship and play the freaking game for a day in 0.0. See your handy fubars first hand .... Wow ... I think you guys have hired too many WOW designers. I think you need to fire some and replace them with people that have and IQ above room temp.
I wonder are they planing on losing all of the us, eu and aussie players. With nerfs like this they will be shutting down the game in a matter of months ... due to insuffient funds to operate the servers. Great way to run a business... PAL
|
Ribikoka
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:27:00 -
[1187]
Nerf bat = Tweaks ? LOL
|
Rumpelstilski
Caldari Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:28:00 -
[1188]
Originally by: Calandari I wonder are they planing on losing all of the us, eu and aussie players. With nerfs like this they will be shutting down the game in a matter of months ... due to insuffient funds to operate the servers. Great way to run a business... PAL
I too would unsubscribe if I had to jump a gate while returning to empire.
On another note, alts just became more valuable, do the math.
|
Tito Sajic
Secret Squirrel Readiness Group Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:30:00 -
[1189]
**** this ****
|
Falin Whalen
Gallente GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:32:00 -
[1190]
CCP: "The nerfs to 0.0 will continue, until 0.0 improves."
:condi:
|
|
Calandari
Retribution. Inc. R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:35:00 -
[1191]
oooo i got and idea .... why not roll back the 0.0 to 2006 days .... thats what you are doing.
just make it offical
|
Turukamu
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:39:00 -
[1192]
Edited by: Turukamu on 11/05/2011 06:39:06 Having a JB network is highly usefull and while i agree at the moment they are too prolific cutting them down to one per system is messy.
Instead the number of jump bridges an alliance can have should be based on the number of systems they hold sov in. eg you can put up a jump bridge for every three or four systems you hold. That way safer jump bridge routes are still possible but not to the extent they are now where they cover entire regions. People will have to be much more selective about where they put JBs as they will not have an unlimited number to play with.
Seems to me this is aimed directly at the NC and it wouldnt suprise me if in a future patch they changed it so that only members of the alliance owning the JB are able to use it. No more passwords to use other alliance JBs and the NC will crumble.
|
Navigator Six
Domination. Legion of The Damned.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:39:00 -
[1193]
Nice job, CCP. I spent a lot of time in 0.0 pre-JBs, and the lawlessness and uncertainty when moving around made life interesting. Glad to see things moving slightly back thataway.
Keep up the good work.
|
Falin Whalen
Gallente GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:42:00 -
[1194]
Originally by: Laser Purification
But since soundwave is basically saying "PVP is more gate ganks" rather than being concerned about actual Sovereignty mechanics I guess it makes warped sense. Though I sort of thought small gang roaming was what low-sec was for.
No, low-sec is just gate ganks too.
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Unknown Soldiers Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:43:00 -
[1195]
Edited by: Zey Nadar on 11/05/2011 06:44:37
Originally by: Rumpelstilski
Originally by: Zey Nadar What changes is that small fleets take longer to reach the fight, meaning less participation in fights. Less small-scale pvp
This part of your reasoning is flawed. If a small gang bothered to jump gazillion jumps into your space without jump bridges you have more chance of having a fight if you don't immediately converge with a 100-men home defense gang perfectly fitted to counter the said small gang.
If that gang is looking for a fight, it will find it. What happens more likely is that it wont find things to shoot until it arrives at a station system where the gang is greatly outnumbered. Then they either retreat or die. (or find out that the enemy is still unwilling to fight). If the gang retreats, the JB change makes pursuing it it harder. All in all, not much pvp happened.
If both sides are willing to fight, fight will happen, jump bridges or no. Im confused as to how jump bridge network somehow changes this. In fact in my opinion it promotes pvp since it allows small roam gangs travel further, faster; before people start to say "I need to log off, got RL to do".
In my previous post I didnt mean roams. I meant fleets that have a specific target in mind. Since JB networks allows fleets to get into the fight faster, WOULDNT THIS IN FACT IMPROVE CHANCES OF FIGHT HAPPENING? Oh thats right, you werent actually looking for a fight. You were looking for a hit-and-run at something. And you can retreat easier now that defensive fleets take longer to reach the fight.
The amount of players on both sides remain unchanged. Just a reminder.
|
Khors
El Barco Pirata
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:43:00 -
[1196]
Edited by: Khors on 11/05/2011 06:43:41 I love changes like this, so many tears! (Harden the fu*k up NC, you are over represented in this thread, but then again you are the reason jumpbridges are being nerfed).
|
Major Stallion
The Dark Horses.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:45:00 -
[1197]
Originally by: Calandari Really ccp has no f-ing clue how the game is played.
pretty sure this change was made BECAUSE of how the game was played. 0.0 Logistics has been a joke the last 4 years..Let's start to see the 0.0 empires actually have to depend on their space and their pilots for more than LOLTECHNETIUM
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Unknown Soldiers Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:50:00 -
[1198]
Originally by: Major Stallion
pretty sure this change was made BECAUSE of how the game was played. 0.0 Logistics has been a joke the last 4 years..Let's start to see the 0.0 empires actually have to depend on their space and their pilots for more than LOLTECHNETIUM
What would that be? seeing as how they just nerfed the reason to defend it for military sov upgrades.
|
Jaymarie Fox Kunis
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:50:00 -
[1199]
Oh Please...for the love of all the Gods...OUR CSM WILL SOLVE EVERYTHING.....LOL....
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 06:55:00 -
[1200]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Feyleaf
Originally by: Balthamel Eval'Raman Still waiting for one good reason why this isn't being deployed in the winter package.
I'm not at all convinced anything would be different. I understand the wish for 0.0 improvements, but this change would still have as polarizing down the road as it is today. The fact is that a lot of people are concerned with their space being less secure, and having to travel a bit further. Those concerns will still exist this winter when we launch the improvements. Anyway, I'm going to bed. I'll try and get some more answers in tomorrow.
The problem is no one believes CCP anymore.
The only part of this I see folks really griping about is the limit of 1 jb per system. 1 is to few. Make it 2 and you would do away with most of the misgivings. The Fuel Change and the no jump capable ships through the jb are fine as is (Though I question why black ops should get an exception and jump freighters aren't since both can use stargates).
You're own words betray that you know these changes will not work as you expect. The disconnect between CCP and the players is pretty vast.
To increase conflict in 0.0 you must increase what a system can supply. The greatest impediment to regular combat is industry. You've created a system where it is easier and more convenient to ship in low end minerals from empire than to mine them because of how you have constructed your systems. A 0.0 system needs five times the ore in a belt that an empire one needs at full status. Without that you don't have enough materials to continually support war. Look at the cycle of great wars, there are several battles even major campaigns, then everyone takes a break for months? Why? Because they have to the human psyche can't take constant combat and the game cannot provide the materials ongoing to provide for constant war, there has to be quiet times to rebuild and refresh.
To aid in helping alliances replenish losses faster you have to improve the industry side in 0.0 and make it self sufficient. You need to possibly consider increased belts size, more belts, more belts from industry index, lowering industry index requirements (way to high right now), increasing the holds of mining ships, increasing extraction rate, increasing tank on mining ships (they need enough tank even the t1 ones so that they can last long enough to call for help).
To make it even viable to jump from empire to 0.0 you have to give them tools to counter the threat of supercarriers. An anti-drone/fighter/fighter-bomber ship can do this. Minelayers can also be used by smaller groups to impede larger ones (but also can be used defensively). You have to open your minds to the hard choices and fixes, something you've not done for almost 3 years because you haven't dedicated sufficient staff to EVE.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 [40] 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |