Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kaivar Lancer
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
247
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 09:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Considering how important player-owned corporations are to the game, why haven't we seen an update or improvement to corp icons? I believe that we are limited to no more than 6 colours (black, white, grey, yellow, blue, red). What about other colours like green, purple, brown etc.? This shouldn't require much resources to update. How hard is it to expand our colour pallette to 1990 standards? |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4619
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:04:00 -
[2] - Quote
Appearance customization isn't exactly CCPs strong point. The offered variety is pretty poor in every aspect of the game. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2544
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
I agree. I wish for the ability to create obnoxious, seizure inducing corp logo's. Apparently booking your flight & accomodation to Iceland BEFORE you buy the tickets for the convention which is pretty much the only reason you wanted to go there in the first place is popular. |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
4619
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:I agree. I wish for the ability to create obnoxious, seizure inducing corp logo's.
I concur, although I think the threat of that is overstated. We have the ability to create disgusting looking avatars, but 99.9% of them are at least attempting to look good and the disgusting ones are mostly creative and funny. People seem to be happy with the customization options and don't really mind the offensive characters. |
Christopher AET
Segmentum Solar Nulli Legio
344
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
Better yet allow us to make custom corp logos in the way we can with alliances I drain ducks of their moisture for sustenance. |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
447
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
You know how many trash "spawn and fail" corps there are? How many 1 man corps there are that are there just to make someone feel important?
No, just no
Double no to alliance style logos.
What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO. |
Pepper Mind
Spicy Enterprises
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 10:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
We don't need larger Corporations We need more smaller Corporations! |
addelee
Low Sec Pharmacies ProtoStar Federation
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:06:00 -
[8] - Quote
TheBlueMonkey wrote: What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO.
And this relates to the topic in what way? The fact it has the word "corp" in it.....
I do kinda agree with the TC. More options would be nice but thats it, "be nice". I don't see it as being hugely important as it's just a logo.
|
Cannibal Kane
The African Terrorist
1467
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
TheBlueMonkey wrote:.
What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO.
Would not mind a bit more choises when doing my logo. At the same time who are you to say I need to stay in a large corp. I like to do my own thing. "I saw him fight by the monument in Jita. -áHe flowed in his Machariel like a Shinto spirit, 800MM shells sprouting in his passing. -áHis hair flowed in the corona of his target's warp core breach. -áIt was truly majestic. -áAnd while everyone stared in awe I stole the loot and ran off.-áBecause I am like that." --áNEONOVUS |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
447
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
addelee wrote:TheBlueMonkey wrote: What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO.
And this relates to the topic in what way? The fact it has the word "corp" in it..... I do kinda agree with the TC. More options would be nice but thats it, "be nice". I don't see it as being hugely important as it's just a logo.
The ability to "play dress up" with your corp, be that though "more pretty colours" or custom logos will do little more then encourage more people to start more pointless corps.
Which I think is bad.
Small corps are ok if they have a purpose beyond "I wanna feel important times" BUT there are entirely too many "ego corps" in game as it is and those corps who are purely there to make the CEO feel important as he sits in high sec, pulls in new players with no idea bout the game and indoctrinates them with "you can't do x until you have y" attitudes, in my mind, is a terrible thing.
A CEO has a responsibility to make the game fun for those in his or her corp. Push the players to try\experience new things and try and facilitate as many options as possible.
Not cling to their flimsy veil of power at the expense of their corp progressing. |
|
Kaivar Lancer
Sinq Laison Chamber of Industry
251
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
TheBlueMonkey wrote:
What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO.
Some of us like being our own boss. If I wanted to snip my own balls, I'd join the goons. |
Ohishi
Apocalypse Reign
39
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kaivar Lancer wrote:Considering how important player-owned corporations are to the game, why haven't we seen an update or improvement to corp icons? I believe that we are limited to no more than 6 colours (black, white, grey, yellow, blue, red). What about other colours like green, purple, brown etc.? This shouldn't require much resources to update. How hard is it to expand our colour pallette to 1990 standards? I agree with this service and or product. |
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
826
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:24:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kaivar Lancer wrote:why haven't we seen an update or improvement to corp icons? corp logos did get a massive rework in Tyrannis. TEST alt - don't trust. |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
447
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Pepper Mind wrote:We don't need larger Corporations We need more smaller Corporations!
From my experience,
The alliances I've been in where it's 1000 people spread across 100 corps have functioned way less cohesively than when I've been in a corp of 1000.
Larger corps, in my experience, work together better.
If you're a 4 man pvp corp and you start flying with another 4 man pvp corp, merging together is a way better idea than forming an alliance nine times out of ten.
If highsec dwellers realized this maybe there would be more highsec people on the CSM. |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
447
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:29:00 -
[15] - Quote
Kaivar Lancer wrote:TheBlueMonkey wrote:
What we need is less corps that are larger, not more reason for people to ego and epeen about being a CEO.
Some of us like being our own boss. If I wanted to snip my own balls, I'd join the goons.
You clearly have a full grasp of how corporations in eve work |
Ohishi
Apocalypse Reign
39
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:32:00 -
[16] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:I agree. I wish for the ability to create obnoxious, seizure inducing corp logo's. Honestly, you guys got lucky with the 'bee'. That is a cool logo. I would love the ability to upload a corp logo though. Most other PvP based games that I played allowed you to make a guild and upload a thumbnail pic for your guild. Why not EVE? The choices for logos here are beyond limited, and all they need to do is open a tiny little piece of the game for someone to do what alliances already get to do with a corp. Make a button for CEOs that says 'upload image'. That is all. Put it in the horrid corp interface and let us design our own corp logos.
Have I mentioned that the corp interface has been horrible for 10 years now? Maybe they could fix that while they are letting us design our own logos. Just a thought.
|
Ifly Uwalk
Empire Tax Collection Agency
580
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:32:00 -
[17] - Quote
TheBlueMonkey wrote:A CEO has a responsibility to make the game fun for those in his or her corp. I don't know whose game forums you think you're on but these here are the forums for EVE Online, a sci-fi themed MMORPG.
In EVE, the only responsibility a CEO has is to make his own wallet fatter. If he can make his minions "have fun" while doing so, fair enough. |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
447
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 11:36:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ifly Uwalk wrote:TheBlueMonkey wrote:A CEO has a responsibility to make the game fun for those in his or her corp. I don't know whose game forums you think you're on but these here are the forums for EVE Online, a sci-fi themed MMORPG. In EVE, the only responsibility a CEO has is to make his own wallet fatter. If he can make his minions "have fun" while doing so, fair enough.
I'm doing it wrong then because I'm broker than Greece |
Dasola
Rookie Empire Citizens Rookie Empire
157
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 17:09:00 -
[19] - Quote
I would take improved corporate role system over update on icons.. We are Minmatar, Our ship are made of scraps, but look what our scraps can do... |
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
2555
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 17:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
I agree. I feel my own corps logo can use some neon and some flashy strobe effects. Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings? |
|
Sol Weinstein
Lunatic Warfare Federation
83
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 17:28:00 -
[21] - Quote
Some of these responses bring up a whole new mess of situations people might want a smaller corp.
The big one is a POS and corp security. And if my "4 man corp" happens to have fun running with another "4 man corp" and the idea of a merger is brought up, the one big thing that is going to be a deal breaker is having to share those assets with other players. Some people form corps to interact with their RL friends because they know that 99% of what they do is going to be safe from the internet grief squads.
Now, I suppose you could say that perhaps some of those characters should remain in one corp, strictly to handle the POS and keep it safe. But then you don't have a true merger. You now just have the same scenario: two corps. Except that one is now a 6 or 7 man corp and the other is a 1 or 2 man corp just to operate the POS. If this is happening more often than not, actually forming an alliance is the better option. This way, both 4 man corps can still interact with each other, even use the POS, but not have to compromise the security of it, or the corp hangar assets in stations.
What this topic really needs to be about is fixing the corp security. Adding more features into corps. Going beyond the 7 hangars in a station. And taking a hard look at the idea of "launch for self" when it comes to a POS. Otherwise, the high industrials will ALWAYS opt to make a small corp simply because of the game mechanics.
Thank you. Oh, and...
Respect the EVE.
The Savior of EVE https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=205546&find=unread |
addelee
Low Sec Pharmacies ProtoStar Federation
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 18:52:00 -
[22] - Quote
TheBlueMonkey wrote:[quote=addelee]
The ability to "play dress up" with your corp, be that though "more pretty colours" or custom logos will do little more then encourage more people to start more pointless corps.
Which I think is bad.
Small corps are ok if they have a purpose beyond "I wanna feel important times" BUT there are entirely too many "ego corps" in game as it is and those corps who are purely there to make the CEO feel important as he sits in high sec, pulls in new players with no idea bout the game and indoctrinates them with "you can't do x until you have y" attitudes, in my mind, is a terrible thing.
A CEO has a responsibility to make the game fun for those in his or her corp. Push the players to try\experience new things and try and facilitate as many options as possible.
Not cling to their flimsy veil of power at the expense of their corp progressing.
I don't think it would encourage people to form small corps, no more than now anyway. CCP are stealthily promoting small corps by the implementation of the isk hole that is NPC corp tax. If they removed that, then there would be far fewer 4 man corps.
How many people really care about playing dress up for the sake of a logo? |
TheBlueMonkey
Don't Be a Menace That Red Alliance
455
|
Posted - 2013.02.28 19:45:00 -
[23] - Quote
Sol Weinstein wrote:Some of these responses bring up a whole new mess of situations people might want a smaller corp.
The big one is a POS and corp security. And if my "4 man corp" happens to have fun running with another "4 man corp" and the idea of a merger is brought up, the one big thing that is going to be a deal breaker is having to share those assets with other players. Some people form corps to interact with their RL friends because they know that 99% of what they do is going to be safe from the internet grief squads.
Now, I suppose you could say that perhaps some of those characters should remain in one corp, strictly to handle the POS and keep it safe. But then you don't have a true merger. You now just have the same scenario: two corps. Except that one is now a 6 or 7 man corp and the other is a 1 or 2 man corp just to operate the POS. If this is happening more often than not, actually forming an alliance is the better option. This way, both 4 man corps can still interact with each other, even use the POS, but not have to compromise the security of it, or the corp hangar assets in stations.
What this topic really needs to be about is fixing the corp security. Adding more features into corps. Going beyond the 7 hangars in a station. And taking a hard look at the idea of "launch for self" when it comes to a POS. Otherwise, the high industrials will ALWAYS opt to make a small corp simply because of the game mechanics.
Thank you. Oh, and...
Respect the EVE.
I agree corp and pos security settings do need to be looked into a hell of a lot more that corpdressup.
That said, if you want a pos and your in a corp and you dont want others to access it. Password it? Uncheck the allow corp/allow alliance options? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |