Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Icarus Starkiller
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:28:00 -
[1]
Okay, CCP, you utterly f'd bookmarks over with cold war and RMR, making it damned near impossible to copy them. You hoped that would curb their abuse... wrong. It just sets up an unimaginably huge inconvenience to the users because they are still a requirment to the game.
Not a convenience, a requirment!, for survival.
Many, many, many suggestions have been put forward by players (both pro bookmark and anti bookmar), but you refuse to acknowledge any of them other than to make using them a pain in the absolute ass.
Now if you have 10 of them in your cargo it takes 1 minute to load... 100 takes ten minutes. More than that and you're utterly locked for tens of minutes, your cargo or your hangar or the can simply will not load because of the lag-inducing changes that have been tagged to them. And that's just to load them, never mind trying to *gasp* copy them for anyone else.
So... fix them, or listen to your users and implent a viable alternative to them!
5km to objects (gates, stations, et al) and a 100km barrier to bookmark placement is the most simple and effective fix. It's not so close as to provide an instant jump for anything larger than a frig, it's far enough to allow campers a chance to engage, and allows even a bs a chance to escape an gank. The current 15km limitation is the entire purpose that has spurred BM spammage... yet you've put in 100km warp options, but not the amazingly simple 5km range. WTF gives? -
ISK Pharmers & Alt spies: A solution
Life is pain...anyone who says differently is selling something. |
Waldo Barnstormer
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:34:00 -
[2]
personally id like bm's to stay, but be impossible to copy. would stop idiots selling (and buying) them
you can always gang up with someone who has an insta and gang warp with em and make your own.
loose = "not rigidly fastened or securely attached" | lose = "fail to win" |
Nee'kita Frist
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:35:00 -
[3]
cos they were a tremendous strain on the database when annoying people would copy 1000s of BMs at a time. --------------
I'm just bitter |
Kylania
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:35:00 -
[4]
Why don't you make your own if you need them? You don't have to copy them. Just like you don't need every bookmark in a region. Copy just the ones you need, or make your own, problem solved. -- Lil Miner |
Derran
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:41:00 -
[5]
7.5 to 10km would be better. 5km to a gate is too close considering you are pointed at the gate. I could get to jump out long before anyone could lock me and stop me.
|
Aramova
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Derran 7.5 to 10km would be better. 5km to a gate is too close considering you are pointed at the gate. I could get to jump out long before anyone could lock me and stop me.
Remember that next time you need a freighter pilot to move a ton of stuff for you ---
|
Tatiana JInMei
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:45:00 -
[7]
lol you should see me I have a hangar full of BPC (100 000 BPC) I can't even open up that dmaned hangar. Think coying is slow try opening my hangar!
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:46:00 -
[8]
BMs a requirement for survival?
aHaHhahHaHAHAHAHAHaHAHAHlolhAHAhAhaHAHAHAHAHA!
Right.
No.
[23] Member: Official Forum Warrior
What's with the blue robots? Click my sig.
|
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 19:46:00 -
[9]
create a navigation skill to increase the default arrival/jumping distance.
lvl 1: 15km from activate area lvl 2: 10km from activate area lvl 3: 7.5km from activate area lvl 4: 6km from activte area lvl 5: 5km from activate area
done. no need for instas, BMs go back to the purpose they were intended for.
|
Spy4Hire
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:11:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Dark Shikari BMs a requirement for survival? Right. No.
Right. Perhaps for a frig/inty/fast cruiser pilot. But for slow cruisers or bs, yes. I've seen many BS without bookmarks drop out into the middle of a tiny camp of sometimes as little as 2 ships, or even 1 if the pilot is good. And if they're not prepared to fight those ships, or can tank their damage long enough to reach the gate while webbed to a standstill, then they die. It's that simple.
And screw the 'skill' idea - nuubs have it hard enough with the umpteen million skills in the game now, adding another one that would be a prerequisite to surviving their first warp is simply not viable. I just say bar nuubs and nuub corps from 0.0, simple solution.
IMO 5km is idea, at most 7.5. That gives everyone, even slow haulers, a 'chance' to make the gate before they get ganked. The current 15km limit is just camp=gank unless the ship is doing 1km/s or more.
|
|
Da Death
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:14:00 -
[11]
Now all those bookmarkers realy earn their cash in time. Its not that easy anymore to buy bookmarks and sell them fast.
For me: The speed is just right
Selling: Absolution - Curse - Gleam S - BPC's - check my bio
|
General Tzu
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:20:00 -
[12]
as a mission runner as my primary source of income, i have to say that BMs are required. don't get me wrong, they are still more annoying than anything if i'm trying to jump 5-10 jumps to pick up new mods...its just easier to hop in my thorax or a frig and boost to the gate and let autopilot do the rest.
but when i'm in my Raven, modded up for missions and only able to fly 143m/s, the 3-5 jumps for the mission are a HUGE time sink. 25% of the missions i'd either lose my mission bonus or the cans would pop before i could get them all or get my hauler to them.
they DO serve a valid purpose..people just go overboard using them sometimes. all this is, of course, avoiding the "getting by the gate camp" function. because we all know how much "skill" it takes to sit at a gate with a gang of people and pop anything that comes through. you want easy kills? people have to have an easy escape. its called balance and you can't have it only one way.
|
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:23:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 13/03/2006 20:24:41
Originally by: Spy4Hire And screw the 'skill' idea - nuubs have it hard enough with the umpteen million skills in the game now, adding another one that would be a prerequisite to surviving their first warp is simply not viable.
surviving thier first warp? they can warp without BMs anywhere in hi-sec without BMs.
plus, many of us who love to haul (I drool one day to have a Charon) we use ABs to increase speed to the gate. When I made my character, I specalized in navigation and command, I had nav III when I first started. Boom, right out of the box I would have a 7.5km warp distance.
It's not adding a skill, but instead adding a bonus for having a currently existing skill. There's no difference and no additional time.
It's the best solution-there's still time to preserve ganking (but this time it requires some actual work, reduces server/client load and work with managing BMs, and also reduces the load with moving around BMs. As a tradeoff, haulers are able to move from 0.0 to empire much easier, driving up the 0.0 to lo-sec economy even more.
I see using a warp distance as a bunus from nav a win-win situation-no need for BMs and instas, and pirates get gank time.
with BMs there is no gank time, without them there is no REASONABLE safety. by allowing this compromise everyone has a benefit.
|
Brutor Shaun
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:51:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Vincent Gaines
lvl 1: 15km from activate area lvl 2: 10km from activate area lvl 3: 7.5km from activate area lvl 4: 6km from activte area lvl 5: 5km from activate area
What if you don't have the skillbook (lvl 0)?
I think this would be better:-
lvl 0: 15km from activate area lvl 1: 12km from activate area lvl 2: 9km from activate area lvl 3: 7km from activte area lvl 4: 5km from activate area lvl 5: 0km from activate area
And it should be a lvl 5 skill at least.
LEAVE MY SIG ALONE!!! |
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 20:53:00 -
[15]
Skill based is pointless, as it simply creates another skill that one "has" to train.
[23] Member: Official Forum Warrior
What's with the blue robots? Click my sig.
|
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:00:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 13/03/2006 21:02:12
Originally by: Brutor Shaun
Originally by: Vincent Gaines
lvl 1: 15km from activate area lvl 2: 10km from activate area lvl 3: 7.5km from activate area lvl 4: 6km from activte area lvl 5: 5km from activate area
What if you don't have the skillbook (lvl 0)?
I think this would be better:-
lvl 0: 15km from activate area lvl 1: 12km from activate area lvl 2: 9km from activate area lvl 3: 7km from activte area lvl 4: 5km from activate area lvl 5: 0km from activate area
And it should be a lvl 5 skill at least.
That'd be just as good :)
except as a level 5 skill. Maybe 3, or even 4, but otherwise make it somewhat accessable from the outset.
Originally by: Dark Shikari Skill based is pointless, as it simply creates another skill that one "has" to train.
You already start with navigation, and you would normally train it up anyway. It's just a more "realistic" bonus. Navigation (general) is what I'm referring to, not a skill inside Nav.
There would be no additional training or skill needed.
|
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:04:00 -
[17]
The same old debate.
Just let people warp to the gate at 0 km and be done with it. It's what most people do already anyway.
NO to a skill. NO to a module. CCP should just accept that travel did not quite work out how they intended and move on.
|
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:06:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 13/03/2006 21:07:38
Originally by: Deja Thoris The same old debate.
Just let people warp to the gate at 0 km and be done with it. It's what most people do already anyway.
NO to a skill. NO to a module. CCP should just accept that travel did not quite work out how they intended and move on.
right now navigation doesn't really concern navigation:
Skill at regulating the power output of ship thrusters. 5% bonus to sub-warp ship velocity per skill level.
that seems more like an engineering skill IMO. And even as someone who hates the thought of gate-camps and pirating at gates, it's still a large part of the game and automatically giving everyone 0km activation by default seems like it's just giving in to carebears..you have to leave some sort of risk in it.
|
Tatiana JInMei
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:10:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Tatiana JInMei on 13/03/2006 21:10:56 Very easy solution X,Y,Z client side.
Nav computer should be intelligent enough to figure the 3D SPACE so should pilot.
But since we have no "right" to create a BM only go there and BM then CCP is forced with keeping the current system.
Removing BM altogether is impossible or just plain retarded (technologicaly wise) since computers in the 20th Century can calculate an X,Y,Z approach already without going there first hand.
The having to go there is already retarded enough please don't make this game a no BM else it becomes a stream line game just like older games, where you have roads and maps which you can't go out of.
This is supposed to be a space game the more it goes the more I fear it is going to become a linear multiple choice game.
"You are in a vast [space pocket]. At is empty you have 3 choices : 1 - Go back 2 - Move forward 3 - Move in a direction without any importance, it is just linked with this spot"
|
Cadadon
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:11:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Vincent Gaines Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 13/03/2006 21:07:38
Originally by: Deja Thoris The same old debate.
Just let people warp to the gate at 0 km and be done with it. It's what most people do already anyway.
NO to a skill. NO to a module. CCP should just accept that travel did not quite work out how they intended and move on.
right now navigation doesn't really concern navigation:
Skill at regulating the power output of ship thrusters. 5% bonus to sub-warp ship velocity per skill level.
that seems more like an engineering skill IMO. And even as someone who hates the thought of gate-camps and pirating at gates, it's still a large part of the game and automatically giving everyone 0km activation by default seems like it's just giving in to carebears..you have to leave some sort of risk in it.
Everyone (well almost) in 0.0 space uses bookmarks. So they land on the gates anyway. Why not just let people warp to 0km straight away, it won't change anything, apart from not having to use bookmarks. Using AP however, should still stick you 15km from the gate.
|
|
Tatiana JInMei
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:14:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Cadadon Using AP however, should still stick you 15km from the gate.
Again why can't computer be trained/programmed with more efficient anchors?
|
Brutor Shaun
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:20:00 -
[22]
Imagine the game with no BMs.
Running a mission and having to collect your cans as you go, as you can't BM back and get them.
No safe spots for ammo dumps.
No safe spots.
No jumping straight to secure cans in belts.
The list goes on. It would be a pain in the butt.
LEAVE MY SIG ALONE!!! |
BurnHard
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:20:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Deja Thoris The same old debate.
Just let people warp to the gate at 0 km and be done with it. It's what most people do already anyway.
NO to a skill. NO to a module. CCP should just accept that travel did not quite work out how they intended and move on.
I'm totally in agreement with this and have always said so. It's the simplest solution. Bubbles can still catch you incoming; outgoing you are vulnerable whether or not you have instas. It would also make travel in Eve less of a PITA/boring timesink. I've only got a few hours a day to play for instance.
|
Oombha
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:20:00 -
[24]
If training a skill to level 5 was required to warp directly to the gate, a lot of us would simply not play the game until the skill was finished.
|
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:21:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 13/03/2006 21:23:49
Originally by: Cadadon Everyone (well almost) in 0.0 space uses bookmarks. So they land on the gates anyway. Why not just let people warp to 0km straight away, it won't change anything, apart from not having to use bookmarks. Using AP however, should still stick you 15km from the gate.
Which we know is an exploit in the game itself, not actually a "feature" of an open-ended environment.
if we just made default 0km approaches why bother even travelling? We could just do it Guild Wars style and instantly appear across the galaxy.
I just figure using the navigation skill to give a bonus to km distance does several things:
1) It fits the description... no better way to explain this other than a nav skill should deal with plotting and accuracy in x/y/z space and not with how effecient thrusters are in warp.
2) It allows for a chance for a pirate to swoop down, and takes away the "sit and just pound" no-work of current gate gankers.
3) BMs are a huge overhead on both the client and server side, not to mention in game.
4) defaulting to 0km just seems.. well.. I dunno pointless. As I said before, if that were the case than just change it to insta-destination.
I love hauling, and even though I haven't spent much time in low-sec I've taken notice of the BM issue and also transporting through empire and 0.0. I hope to haul a lot in the future, so normally I'd be expected to love the idea of a default 0km, but I still want it to be a challenge. I think that a char should work to be a good navigator, not have it handed to them.
You still need BMs for cans, hauling to belts and back, safe spots, areas of interest, etc. But having a skill system will take the need to have a huge list of BMs that may or may not be accurate. In fact, leave the option to have BMs, so if someone decides to use them instead of skilling to accurate distances, they run the risk of having bad info.
it would just be more exciting that way.
|
Arkanor
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:28:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Dark Shikari BMs a requirement for survival?
aHaHhahHaHAHAHAHAHaHAHAHlolhAHAhAhaHAHAHAHAHA!
Right.
No.
In low sec they are for those of us who don't fly interceptors or faction battleships macked out with tech II guns and equipment.
|
Keersom
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:30:00 -
[27]
The best solution I have ever seen to the BM issue can be found here:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=186467
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:31:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Arkanor
Originally by: Dark Shikari BMs a requirement for survival?
aHaHhahHaHAHAHAHAHaHAHAHlolhAHAhAhaHAHAHAHAHA!
Right.
No.
In low sec they are for those of us who don't fly interceptors or faction battleships macked out with tech II guns and equipment.
Got no friends?
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Vincent Gaines
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:37:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Keersom The best solution I have ever seen to the BM issue can be found here:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=186467
that's too much
just giving accuracy to the nav skill can solve almost all the BM problems
|
Arkanor
|
Posted - 2006.03.13 21:37:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Arkanor on 13/03/2006 21:37:25
Originally by: Deja Thoris The same old debate.
Just let people warp to the gate at 0 km and be done with it. It's what most people do already anyway.
NO to a skill. NO to a module. CCP should just accept that travel did not quite work out how they intended and move on.
Yeah seriously, if they really want to stop you they can probably afford a deployable warpcore disruptor or interdictor probes.
@ Avon: No I don't
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |