Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
79
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 05:39:00 -
[181] - Quote
Can't wait till local gets removed or changed to WH mechanics...keep the forums entertaining CCP. |
Darth Gustav
Interwebs Cooter Explosion Fatal Ascension
1292
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 05:41:00 -
[182] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:Can't wait till local gets removed or changed to WH mechanics...keep the forums entertaining CCP. If they do that what ridiculous thing TM will people howl for next? Just curious. He who trolls trolls best when he who is trolled trolls the troller. -Darth Gustav's Axiom |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4962
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 05:43:00 -
[183] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:Can't wait till local gets removed or changed to WH mechanics...keep the forums entertaining CCP.
hiseccers claim not to care about nullsec while clamoring for changes to nullsec?
shocking please leave |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
406
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 08:13:00 -
[184] - Quote
Capqu wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote:And lets not forget you can simply just wait for him to kill off the small things before decloaking and engaging. Or if he's saving them until last, wait until theres just a few left, decloak, point bear, kill/tank rats, kill bear. Capqu wrote:Adapt? I think you missed the part where CCP FoxFour explicitly stated soloing in a stealth bomber is dead and gone. How can you adapt that? I think you missed the part where FoxFour is simply wrong. If you're not going to believe the person who thought out, tested and implemented these changes, then how on earth can you support them?
The reason I don't believe him is because I've spent two years in wormholes. With sleepers who change targets, and are even more aggressive and hit even harder than these changed null npcs will. Guess what? People running pve in wormholes get ganked all the time.
Also, I offered a bloody explanation of how you could work within the mechanics to do it - how about you (or foxfour, if he likes) point out the flaws in what I said? Instead of just dismissing them and crying. |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
406
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 08:18:00 -
[185] - Quote
Capqu wrote:BoBoZoBo wrote:I do not support this view.
Why should NPCs ignore a juicy target... you wouldn't. Why should NPCs continue attacking targets they cannot take down... you wouldn't. Why should NPCs help you kill something you would benefit from... you wouldn't
Not to mention, there is already an in-game precedent for this as WH hunters have to deal with this already. Maybe you just need to expand your horizons and raise the challenge bar a bit?
Besides, what after you made your kill? Do they continue to ignore you? Help you loot? It is good and immersive to have smarter AI all around that treats everyone equally. Keeps everyone on their toes. Must be nice to be able to sit and wait for an opportune moment to attack without some sort of easily accessible intel channel letting you know exactly who is nearby. Hunting in W-Space is very different to K-Space, so please stop drawing false parallels and misleading people.
NPCs being smarter and changing targets and what not (instead of being brainless garbage like they currently are) is not the problem though, the problem is the stupid, instant, infallible intel tool that is local. Fix the real issue rather than crying about something that in itself isn't the problem (and is in fact a vast improvement) |
Golar Crexis
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 10:14:00 -
[186] - Quote
SO to sum up the arguments against so far we have had:
1. People who have never been ganked or have never tried hunting in 0.0 trying to make some ******** argument based on RL situations.
2. People who have been ganked in 0.0 and blame us for their mistakes (we can't catch you unless you make one) supporting this cause for the extra protection if they do make a mistake.
3. People who are concerned but believe the AI changes won't affect ganking as badly as we make it out to be. Fair enough but we are sharing the results of our testing on sisi to show people as to why we reached these conclusions. And you are free to do your own testing as well. Try tackling a carrier in a sanctum. No seriously its hilarious what happens.
4. Wormhole dwellers pointing out quite correctly that they have had to deal with this problem for a long time. Fair enough but you have it on easy mode. Wormhole ganking isn't hard, You do not have to contend with the following: Local Intel channels Jumpbridge networks allowing for the pursuing home def fleet to get ahead of us Dead end systems where we can get camped in.
5. People who misread the OP.
So in short these are the main types of arguments for the current version of the new AI. Our stance on the new AI is this:
The new AI is wonderful and long overdue. However ratters get an unforseen buff to their own safety simply due to the fact that the AI will swap to a target that isn't shooting it. We don't agree with that and want ccp to make sure they fully understand what they are doing before implementing this change (protip: I wouldn't trust CCP's opinion on the finer details of any matter relating to pvp and life in null-sec.) |
Whisperen
That's Not A Knife Flatline.
14
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:24:00 -
[187] - Quote
Solution: Give all the 0.0 rat frigates scrams/webs that way the ratter can decide to kill them first and not be tackled and the bomber/dessie/inty/dictor 's have a clear shot or the ratter can leave them have potential bomber defense and be tackled until the rats are dead. |
Golar Crexis
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:44:00 -
[188] - Quote
Whisperen wrote:Solution: Give all the 0.0 rat frigates scrams/webs that way the ratter can decide to kill them first and not be tackled and the bomber/dessie/inty/dictor 's have a clear shot or the ratter can leave them have potential bomber defense and be tackled until the rats are dead.
Its a good idea but a problem is most ratters actually rat in forsaken hubs where there are no frigates for precisely these reasons. perhaps they will switch over with the new AI and be at risk of being tackled but I doubt it.
You really have to try playing the game from our side to see how much **** we have to put up with already before we even get to the new AI. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1525
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:25:00 -
[189] - Quote
Darth Gustav wrote:Sobaan Tali wrote:Can't wait till local gets removed or changed to WH mechanics...keep the forums entertaining CCP. If they do that what ridiculous thing TM will people howl for next? Just curious. Nerfing blobs is the final boss of nerfing. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
287
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:41:00 -
[190] - Quote
Alexa Coates wrote:I'm a pve mission runner and I welcome these new changes. The way I see it is that lore wise, rats finally adapted pod technology or developed their own.
All I know is, missions will be an actual challenge now, therefore fun.
That's just the thing, they won't.
They are not adjusting difficulty of missions, changing objectives or what not. The change will make npcs switch targets, period.
Go here and read CCP FoxFour's post on the matter.
The most relevant part considering your post: CCP FoxFour wrote:
Admittedly for those that solo missions in a ship that has no drones this change means nothing at all. It has the largest impact on drone users and groups of players.
How exactly is this making anything better. The Drone Boaters (of which I am not a member, even with drone damage mods, drones are too much damn work when I can just blap stuff with my machariel) and people who like to play cooperatively (among others) will face the problem, but people like me who just dual box 2 ships capable of tanking the entire room solo won't notice a difference.
In missions and anomalies I use machariel supported byt FoF missle Tengu, the Tengu serving the same close in/point defense role as drones would, because it's more dps and I don't have to fool with EVE's HORRIBLE drone interface. So this change does zero to me.
It's still the wrong thing to do. A better thing would be make the drone interface less crap 1st THEN if you want to increase the "tedium factor" for drone users, go ahead.
On of the supposed purposes of this change is to deter AFK missioning with drones. Thing is, if it works on TQ the same way it worked on the test server, all an afk domi (for example) is going to have to change is remove one cap recharger and replace it with a ECM Burst I to keep aggro off drone through threat management and boom, "afk domi nerf" circumvented.
Still kind of amazing that so many people can't see the potential problems with this.
|
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
287
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:46:00 -
[191] - Quote
MadMuppet wrote:I'm trying really hard to have sympathy for the gankers here, I really am, but I would rather have the new AI implemented and their concerns be address after all the PVE missioner tears clear (and they will... "WTF? My Drones!") than to delay it because of a few people being unhappy from the nerf.
I will follow that up by mentioning that I have been on the receiving ends of enough nerfs that I have almost no sympathy for anybody getting nerfed. In the past I was running back from SiSi screaming that the changes were going to cause issues and it fell on deaf ears (unified inventory). So, don't worry, they'll fix it in the long run and it wont be like the old times, but they will tell you it is.
This one wins best badpost of the thread award. So because other people didn't listen when you warned them, you stop listening to warning? That's childish IMO.
The underlined part is a big problem for me, the people cheering this proposal are actually cheering bad design thinking, inefficiency and wasted money. in other words, not being good customers, because good customers demand excellence not "well, yall can fix it later down the road I guess".
CCP should try to do it right the 1st time. Telling us "this is a change we believe in" (the DEVS own words) while then telling us how it's going to negatively affect a pvp tactic it's not meant to change, or how it's not even going to register with people who don't use drones ect ect, is very bad policy on their part. |
Capqu
Love Squad
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:02:00 -
[192] - Quote
Hopefully FoxFour gives us more info soon. http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
Capqu
Love Squad
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:03:00 -
[193] - Quote
Whisperen wrote:Solution: Give all the 0.0 rat frigates scrams/webs that way the ratter can decide to kill them first and not be tackled and the bomber/dessie/inty/dictor 's have a clear shot or the ratter can leave them have potential bomber defense and be tackled until the rats are dead.
I like this idea. But it would actually be a pretty significant buff to catching ratters, which may not be what CCP want. http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
287
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:22:00 -
[194] - Quote
Capqu wrote:Hopefully FoxFour gives us more info soon.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2003211#post2003211
As we knew would happen, the DEVs in question are running into snags. This isn't an "I told you so moment", this is a "we know the game we spend thousands of hours playing, which is why we suggest caution and doing things the right way" moment.
The most likely end result of this new post from Fox is we could end up with a "hodge-podge" NPC AI situation, were some are dumb and some are smart. It would simply be better to build from the ground up for consistency (like with incursions and wormholes) if nothing else. |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
407
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:41:00 -
[195] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:SO to sum up the arguments against so far we have had:
1. People who have never been ganked or have never tried hunting in 0.0 trying to make some ******** argument based on RL situations.
2. People who have been ganked in 0.0 and blame us for their mistakes (we can't catch you unless you make one) supporting this cause for the extra protection if they do make a mistake.
3. People who are concerned but believe the AI changes won't affect ganking as badly as we make it out to be. Fair enough but we are sharing the results of our testing on sisi to show people as to why we reached these conclusions. And you are free to do your own testing as well. Try tackling a carrier in a sanctum. No seriously its hilarious what happens.
4. Wormhole dwellers pointing out quite correctly that they have had to deal with this problem for a long time. Fair enough but you have it on easy mode. Wormhole ganking isn't hard, You do not have to contend with the following: Local Intel channels Jumpbridge networks allowing for the pursuing home def fleet to get ahead of us Dead end systems where we can get camped in.
5. People who misread the OP.
So in short these are the main types of arguments for the current version of the new AI. Our stance on the new AI is this:
The new AI is wonderful and long overdue. However ratters get an unforseen buff to their own safety simply due to the fact that the AI will swap to a target that isn't shooting it. We don't agree with that and want ccp to make sure they fully understand what they are doing before implementing this change (protip: I wouldn't trust CCP's opinion on the finer details of any matter relating to pvp and life in null-sec.)
Stopped paying attention when you claimed wormhole PVP was "easy mode".
NPCs switching targets is not a problem at all - or at least, in and of itself it isn't. If other mechanics (cough local cough) are problematic then this may highlight it a bit more, but you can't demand the current awful, useless NPC mechanics stay awful and useless as a result of that, that's just silly
I can't believe the 1337 NULL PVP PROS are crying over a god damn npc frigate ruining their ability for 1337 NULL PVP ACTION.
Edit: Actually, whats the point in even arguing. CCP have made it very, very clear that they're turning this into Hello Kitty Online. Failwatch, miner buff, and more. By winter 2014 all PVE will be instanced and only corp members can access those pockets of space. |
Capqu
Love Squad
33
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 15:55:00 -
[196] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote: Edit: Actually, whats the point in even arguing. CCP have made it very, very clear that they're turning this into Hello Kitty Online. Failwatch, miner buff, and more. By winter 2014 all PVE will be instanced and only corp members can access those pockets of space.
If you have this view, why are you arguing for making null sec ratting safer? I agree that WH PVE is harder than K space PVE, but an AI change is not going to change that, or indeed make K space PVE harder in the majority of cases. All it does for the average ratter (read: solo tengu/drake without drones out) is make the ratter more likely to survive being tackled, a situation they had ample time to avoid. http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
287
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 16:34:00 -
[197] - Quote
Capqu wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote: Edit: Actually, whats the point in even arguing. CCP have made it very, very clear that they're turning this into Hello Kitty Online. Failwatch, miner buff, and more. By winter 2014 all PVE will be instanced and only corp members can access those pockets of space.
If you have this view, why are you arguing for making null sec ratting safer? I agree that WH PVE is harder than K space PVE, but an AI change is not going to change that, or indeed make K space PVE harder in the majority of cases. All it does for the average ratter (read: solo tengu/drake without drones out) is make the ratter more likely to survive being tackled, a situation they had ample time to avoid.
And yet either no one can see that coming, or no one cares lol.
I've used a tactic in The MAZE to protect myself while doing it, leaving some scram rats and all the battleships in the 1st 2 rooms. That lus the difficulty of someone who doesn't PVE finding the right gate to begin with as a nice "shield" for my ships in the 5th room, and more than once i noticed a new player ship wreck on scan. It let me basically ignore probes on my scanner, so what if they find me, the Guristas will protect me lol.
This new AI proposal potentially spreads that to ALL null and even low sec complexes that don't require you to kill everything to unlock a gate (and there are a few plexes like that). It even makes anomalies safer.
I simply don't think "Nullcord" is a good idea. I've been ratting in null with the same mach and 2 tengus set up for 2 years, haven't lost a single ship, null is already easy to survive in if you stay at the keyboard, this adding another layer of protection is not really called for.
|
S'No Flake
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 20:10:00 -
[198] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Site ganks in WHs happen ALL the time and sleepers have always have this kind of AI so I don't see this as much of an issue. Yeah..... Let me just highlight the part I found most relevant. So while I respect wormholers and the hijinks they get up to, I believe you guys have it easy. No Local, no intel channels and no jumpbridges for that home def fleet chasing you. But hey thanks for posting man.
Heh... you know.. is not that easy in a WH as you make it look like :)
|
Golar Crexis
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 22:52:00 -
[199] - Quote
S'No Flake wrote:Golar Crexis wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Site ganks in WHs happen ALL the time and sleepers have always have this kind of AI so I don't see this as much of an issue. Yeah..... Let me just highlight the part I found most relevant. So while I respect wormholers and the hijinks they get up to, I believe you guys have it easy. No Local, no intel channels and no jumpbridges for that home def fleet chasing you. But hey thanks for posting man. Heh... you know.. is not that easy in a WH as you make it look like :)
Yeah I know.
I honestly respect and admire wormholers and I am quite jealous of both the isk they make and the no local they get to have
I also recognize the down side of living in a pos and having to deal with that horrible horrible interface and mechanics.
I just wanted to point out that the difference between null-sec and wormholes is local and all the powerful intel tools that are available to the common ratter.
Actually just very quickly but have you ever heard of chimes in the context of eve? Since local is now compact some clever sod has made a simple program that watches your local window while you rat and immediately chimes when a red enters local, thus allowing for semi afk ratting in null-sec with incredibly reduced risk. |
Zero Audier
five finger death punch
1
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 02:28:00 -
[200] - Quote
Bloodpetal wrote:Myelinated wrote:
1-3 bil isk Faction fit pve ship are a juicier target than a 50 mil stealth.
Wormholes don't have local as a instant intel channel, removing local from non w-space would be fine. Actually I'd very much love to see all local channels in eve function like wormhole local.
This change basically kills low sp pvp, which hurts new players most of all(you know that thing a mmo needs to stay alive)
How does this kill low-sp PVP? Instead of bombers, use Assault Frigates, or Recon Cruisers... Or... Or..
This is the problem. Why the EVE fanbase hasen't rioted at CCP HQ for this already I duno. This change wouldn't be as bad if stealth bombers were adaptable, but they aren't. They are as the OP said, extremely luck based, while still extremely high skill capped. Its dam near impossible to kill something with them currently. Do you know the weakness of stealth bombers? Light drones, frigates, and anything that can catch up to it. So now those ratting battle cruisers that we rely on as targets are now the least of our concerns. As far as the whole, shoot at the weakest enemy, so they are just going to flat out stop shooting at this ratter, and while still getting shot at, fly towards the SB, just ignoring their original target all together? Logic is a double edged sword in this situation. How about instead of just immediately dropping everything to go shoot this new target, how about a minute or two before they switch, depending on how close the ship is to their size?
|
|
Roime
Shiva Furnace Dead On Arrival Alliance
1302
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 05:40:00 -
[201] - Quote
Proteus.
Or if you can't adapt or afford one, whine on the forums.
Gallente - the choice of the interstellar gentleman |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
850
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 08:46:00 -
[202] - Quote
Golar Crexis wrote:S'No Flake wrote:Golar Crexis wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Site ganks in WHs happen ALL the time and sleepers have always have this kind of AI so I don't see this as much of an issue. Yeah..... Let me just highlight the part I found most relevant. So while I respect wormholers and the hijinks they get up to, I believe you guys have it easy. No Local, no intel channels and no jumpbridges for that home def fleet chasing you. But hey thanks for posting man. Heh... you know.. is not that easy in a WH as you make it look like :) Yeah I know. I honestly respect and admire wormholers and I am quite jealous of both the isk they make and the no local they get to have I also recognize the down side of living in a pos and having to deal with that horrible horrible interface and mechanics. I just wanted to point out that the difference between null-sec and wormholes is local and all the powerful intel tools that are available to the common ratter. Wormholes function fine without local because sites of interest must be probed down (probes cannot be cloaked or hidden), because hot-drops are literally impossible, and because they're secluded and difficult to reach.
Golar Crexis wrote:Actually just very quickly but have you ever heard of chimes in the context of eve? Since local is now compact some clever sod has made a simple program that watches your local window while you rat and immediately chimes when a red enters local, thus allowing for semi afk ratting in null-sec with incredibly reduced risk. Doing so is also a violation of the Terms of Service just as much as botting itself is. http://themittani.com/features/local-problem A simple fix to the local intel problem |
Golar Crexis
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 11:44:00 -
[203] - Quote
Roime wrote:Proteus.
Or if you can't adapt or afford one, whine on the forums.
Yes because 1 month old newbs should be in a proteus. And seprentis and guriste's don't shoot a prteus damage type.
\o/ truly we fail at adapting our low-skill pilots to these changes.
Quote: Doing so is also a violation of the Terms of Service just as much as botting itself is.
I would actually like to know ccp's stance on this. From my point of view its an exploit using out of game 3rd party software. I don't see it as botting simply cause all it does is monitor a chat window and then ping to alert the pilot. It would be really nice if we could get ccp's stance on this, although even if they say its a banning offense I really doubt they will be able to detect or catch people using it. |
Capqu
Love Squad
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 13:25:00 -
[204] - Quote
Any word of when this is going back up on test server? There are some more things I want to test and give feedback on. http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2496
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 13:41:00 -
[205] - Quote
Capqu wrote:Any word of when this is going back up on test server? There are some more things I want to test and give feedback on. It appears Duality will be down for a couple of weeks. I'm not sure if that means no testing at all until the 19th, or if we'll have an opportunity elsewhere. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Capqu
Love Squad
34
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:06:00 -
[206] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Capqu wrote:Any word of when this is going back up on test server? There are some more things I want to test and give feedback on. It appears Duality will be down for a couple of weeks. I'm not sure if that means no testing at all until the 19th, or if we'll have an opportunity elsewhere.
Thanks for the info, kind of annoying but I'm sure it can't be helped. Guess we'll have to wait and see then. http://pizza.eve-kill.net |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Elysian Empire
409
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 14:31:00 -
[207] - Quote
Capqu wrote:TheGunslinger42 wrote: Edit: Actually, whats the point in even arguing. CCP have made it very, very clear that they're turning this into Hello Kitty Online. Failwatch, miner buff, and more. By winter 2014 all PVE will be instanced and only corp members can access those pockets of space.
If you have this view, why are you arguing for making null sec ratting safer? I agree that WH PVE is harder than K space PVE, but an AI change is not going to change that, or indeed make K space PVE harder in the majority of cases. All it does for the average ratter (read: solo tengu/drake without drones out) is make the ratter more likely to survive being tackled, a situation they had ample time to avoid.
Except I'm NOT arguing for making k-space PVE easier or "safer". I happen to believe we can have more intelligent npcs without making it "safer" - so long as the 'templates' aren't too easy. Bring on the neuts, extreme aggression, target switching, and more... and if we fix local, because lets face it, a frigate rat shooting at you as you try to kill a bear is nowhere near as big a safety net as local being instant and infallible.
|
MadMuppet
A Better Corp Name
555
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 15:30:00 -
[208] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:MadMuppet wrote:I'm trying really hard to have sympathy for the gankers here, I really am, but I would rather have the new AI implemented and their concerns be address after all the PVE missioner tears clear (and they will... "WTF? My Drones!") than to delay it because of a few people being unhappy from the nerf.
I will follow that up by mentioning that I have been on the receiving ends of enough nerfs that I have almost no sympathy for anybody getting nerfed. In the past I was running back from SiSi screaming that the changes were going to cause issues and it fell on deaf ears (unified inventory). So, don't worry, they'll fix it in the long run and it wont be like the old times, but they will tell you it is. This one wins best badpost of the thread award. So because other people didn't listen when you warned them, you stop listening to warning? That's childish IMO. The underlined part is a big problem for me, the people cheering this proposal are actually cheering bad design thinking, inefficiency and wasted money. in other words, not being good customers, because good customers demand excellence not "well, yall can fix it later down the road I guess". CCP should try to do it right the 1st time. Telling us "this is a change we believe in" (the DEVS own words) while then telling us how it's going to negatively affect a pvp tactic it's not meant to change, or how it's not even going to register with people who don't use drones ect ect, is very bad policy on their part.
You're right, it is a defeatist post, I won't deny it, but CCP doesn't listen to these kind of complaints until after the damage is done and I doubt very much that this is going to be any different this time. The feature has been announced, a date has been set, the train has left the station. Unless this feature makes the game itself unplayble or is a huge security issue it is going to be implemented.
TLDR : I do not disagree with you that CCP should do it right the first time, but the design process is already passed the decision stage.
If I tried to make a type of coffee that made all of you happy, and you rated it, the group score for it would be about 60 out of 100. Break into 3 or 4 coffee clusters, and made coffee just for each cluster, the scores would go from 60 to 78. The difference between coffee at 60 and coffee at 78 is a difference between coffee that makes you wince or makes you happy. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
288
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 15:58:00 -
[209] - Quote
MadMuppet wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:MadMuppet wrote:I'm trying really hard to have sympathy for the gankers here, I really am, but I would rather have the new AI implemented and their concerns be address after all the PVE missioner tears clear (and they will... "WTF? My Drones!") than to delay it because of a few people being unhappy from the nerf.
I will follow that up by mentioning that I have been on the receiving ends of enough nerfs that I have almost no sympathy for anybody getting nerfed. In the past I was running back from SiSi screaming that the changes were going to cause issues and it fell on deaf ears (unified inventory). So, don't worry, they'll fix it in the long run and it wont be like the old times, but they will tell you it is. This one wins best badpost of the thread award. So because other people didn't listen when you warned them, you stop listening to warning? That's childish IMO. The underlined part is a big problem for me, the people cheering this proposal are actually cheering bad design thinking, inefficiency and wasted money. in other words, not being good customers, because good customers demand excellence not "well, yall can fix it later down the road I guess". CCP should try to do it right the 1st time. Telling us "this is a change we believe in" (the DEVS own words) while then telling us how it's going to negatively affect a pvp tactic it's not meant to change, or how it's not even going to register with people who don't use drones ect ect, is very bad policy on their part. You're right, it is a defeatist post, I won't deny it, but CCP doesn't listen to these kind of complaints until after the damage is done and I doubt very much that this is going to be any different this time. The feature has been announced, a date has been set, the train has left the station. Unless this feature makes the game itself unplayble or is a huge security issue it is going to be implemented. TLDR : I do not disagree with you that CCP should do it right the first time, but the design process is already passed the decision stage.
Oh I know, I just have a little more faith in CCP, because ever since the "riots" they have seemed to be more forth coming.
I guess this issue is so interesting to me because in some ways it kind of feels like CCP was starting to "backslide" into some old disastrous , wasteful ways. |
Probebly Afk Cloaking
No Self Esteem Malefic Aspects
4
|
Posted - 2012.10.05 16:15:00 -
[210] - Quote
posting in a boehoe they nerf my playstyle thread
Gun Gal wrote:Its good, but I see your whine.
You are sad that you cannot take advantage of all the aggro being on the ratter, with you to soak him as well
The new system will make you possible a target as well.
Perfect! Lets face it, it is a bad game mechanic that let that happen in the first place, and you should be a target, after all the enemy hates you too.
Suck it up princess
^this
adept |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |