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 .. 61 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
The Tebo
The Tebo Corp Brainfarts
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:45:00 -
[601] - Quote
I still think it would be neat to use Salvage drones to pick apart peoples ships... using them as a weapons......
nothing like.. tackling someone. and instead of blowing them up..... take them apart.. piece by piece while they are helpless to get away. |
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
209
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:45:00 -
[602] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote: Why can't just CCP realise that nullsec is just a vocal minority, irrelevant for the most subscribers? Hello Dinsdale |
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
644
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:46:00 -
[603] - Quote
The Tebo wrote:I still think it would be neat to use Salvage drones to pick apart peoples ships... using them as a weapons...... nothing like.. tackling someone. and instead of blowing them up..... take them apart.. piece by piece while they are helpless to get away. salvager moduals vs minmatar ships :P _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
997
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:46:00 -
[604] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:what you described is a prioritization, yes. however read what is wrote in the original post. it contradicts itself on that very point. he even puts emphasis on not wanting to have a negative impact incursion runners above all others. I'm having trouble with viewing that as anything other than an incorrect estimation of the number of drones an individual pilot would have a reasonable opportunity to manage in an incursion at best. Even then it's not so much a contradiction as just being wrong (and probably subsequently deciding it's not worth fixing). |
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
644
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:47:00 -
[605] - Quote
i feel the drone assist nerf is also a sham.. its to placate and avert people away form the real problem which is ISBoxer+insta alpha ships _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
13754
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:49:00 -
[606] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Tyberius Franklin wrote:There is no contradiction, simply the fact that the potential harms to incursions, while undesirable, were of considerably lower importance than the decided balance point for drone assist. In the end any negative effect is still negligible, at worse making a second drone bunny, so it really hold no weight against the primary goal. the fact that there is a negative effect, regardless of negligibility is the exact contradiction. What makes it infuriating is that they're bowing to nullsec grunts and break highsec playstyle at the same time. Why can't just CCP realise that nullsec is just a vocal minority, irrelevant for the most subscribers?
12,000 trials were started in the week after B-R.
No doubt this was because they all heard Incursions are so awesome and wanted to run them one day.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Allus Nova
Abraxsys Get Off My Lawn
42
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:53:00 -
[607] - Quote
Demotress wrote:While you are at it, why not switch the name of the game to goons get what they want online. After all every time they tell you to change something, you do it. Nerf needed or not.
This wasn't a goons gets what they want issue, this is a nerf bad game mechanics issue. Goons 1000 man Domi fleets will be just as affected as the N3 "wrecking ball" |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Academy The ROC
2322
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:54:00 -
[608] - Quote
Very nice.
Preserves most legitimate uses, takes out the bad.
Not as elegant as I'd have liked (I would have preferred a "Drone Commander" skill), but it gets it in the goalposts, certainly. Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á |
Charadrass
Angry Germans
123
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:59:00 -
[609] - Quote
Ive never seen the powerblocks clashing with lightdrones. So yes, there is a difference.
Otherwise i would like to have more then ten targets lockable so i can command my drones on seperate targets at the same time. If not, then ccp is simply nerfing incursions by slowing down HQ fleets, by needing 4 dronebuddys reducing the killspeed of either the battleships or the frigs.
So ccp, butter bei de fische. Is your target the overwhelming usage of sentrys in big fleet fights or slowing down incursions. |
AetomHaert Mother
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:59:00 -
[610] - Quote
Oh Takashawa wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Affect carriers more heavily than sub-caps (because they can field 10 drones per ship rather than 5) Can we take this as a sign, then, that CCP holds the opinion that capitals should offer even fewer advantages to offset the increased cost, effort, risk, and skills required to effectively field them, as compared to simply fielding big piles of subcaps? Also, a broader question - do you intend to leave any force multipliers in EVE, Rise, or simply reduce it to whoever has more dudes in T1 subcaps, or alternatively, in bombers? It seems to be trending a lot that way lately, and I'm just curious if that's intentional or simply persistent oversight.
|
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
The Riot Formation Fatal Ascension
84
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 22:59:00 -
[611] - Quote
Zwo Zateki wrote:Malcanis wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:A very polite incursion community response:
**** you CCP CSM response: Adapt. Response to CSM: Before you say "adapt" try running incursions at least once in a while. We couldn't care less about how nullsec FCs command their slaves just so that big bosses get cars, apartments and enterprises IRL via RMT.
And Null Sec couldn't care less about a bunch of incursion runners having to actually learn how to adapt to Eve's constantly changing game. Adapt or go play something else. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
20
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:06:00 -
[612] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:Malcanis wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:A very polite incursion community response:
**** you CCP CSM response: Adapt. Response to CSM: Before you say "adapt" try running incursions at least once in a while. We couldn't care less about how nullsec FCs command their slaves just so that big bosses get cars, apartments and enterprises IRL via RMT. And Null Sec couldn't care less about a bunch of incursion runners having to actually learn how to adapt to Eve's constantly changing game. Adapt or go play something else.
Incursion runners are so vocal in large part because we do adapt to many different aspects of the game. For example, there are PVP offshoots of many if not most longstanding communities. There are fleets to run other, less lucrative, PVE when there aren't incursions. There are players who fund their participation in nullblobs via incursions. This is, In my opinion, a case of "This change is more negative on our preferred playstyle than you think. can we suggest other things that hurt our playstyle less that also reduce the problem stated, especially since CCP said they did not want to negatively impact our playstyle?" That crazy bag FC with the silly things on the hull that shouldn't but just did. |
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
997
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:06:00 -
[613] - Quote
Charadrass wrote:Ive never seen the powerblocks clashing with lightdrones. So yes, there is a difference.
Otherwise i would like to have more then ten targets lockable so i can command my drones on seperate targets at the same time. If not, then ccp is simply nerfing incursions by slowing down HQ fleets, by needing 4 dronebuddys reducing the killspeed of either the battleships or the frigs.
So ccp, butter bei de fische. Is your target the overwhelming usage of sentrys in big fleet fights or slowing down incursions. So an HQ fleet has 40 DPS'ers that need to assign drones? I'm not familiar with the fleet comps for HQ's. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
The Riot Formation Fatal Ascension
84
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:06:00 -
[614] - Quote
I think the best out of this is the n3/pl/cfc Bro's that all Agree That this was horrid game-play and it needed changing vs the few players fighting to get it back vs the army of players hiding on neutrals arguing to fix the archons on toons not even flying them. It's a sad day when the players Officially using the Drone Doctrines, NOT hiding on ALT's are all Agreeing is was **** gameplay. Comparable to the ones not wiling to post on there mains arguing why it should stay.
Bring the game back to the players, Not to the FC's. Giving us back control of our ships and forcing us to stay at the keyboards, paying attention and not playing other games with EVE MINIMIZED is the best move yet. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
The Riot Formation Fatal Ascension
84
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:09:00 -
[615] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:Malcanis wrote:Zwo Zateki wrote:A very polite incursion community response:
**** you CCP CSM response: Adapt. Response to CSM: Before you say "adapt" try running incursions at least once in a while. We couldn't care less about how nullsec FCs command their slaves just so that big bosses get cars, apartments and enterprises IRL via RMT. And Null Sec couldn't care less about a bunch of incursion runners having to actually learn how to adapt to Eve's constantly changing game. Adapt or go play something else. Incursion runners are so vocal in large part because we do adapt to many different aspects of the game. For example, there are PVP offshoots of many if not most longstanding communities. There are fleets to run other, less lucrative, PVE when there aren't incursions. There are players who fund their participation in nullblobs via incursions. This is, In my opinion, a case of "This change is more negative on our preferred playstyle than you think. can we suggest other things that hurt our playstyle less that also reduce the problem stated, especially since CCP said they did not want to negatively impact our playstyle?"
Your current Doctrines aren't being forced to change, Your players are just being forced to do more.. Actually play the game and removing the Toxic Lazy gameplay that has embedded itself in eve. I pitty the fact you have to train some new Squad commanders to actually do something in a fight instead of just moving around anchored. |
AetomHaert Mother
The Scope Gallente Federation
29
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:10:00 -
[616] - Quote
Oh Takashawa wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Affect carriers more heavily than sub-caps (because they can field 10 drones per ship rather than 5) Can we take this as a sign, then, that CCP holds the opinion that capitals should offer even fewer advantages to offset the increased cost, effort, risk, and skills required to effectively field them, as compared to simply fielding big piles of subcaps? Also, a broader question - do you intend to leave any force multipliers in EVE, Rise, or simply reduce it to whoever has more dudes in T1 subcaps, or alternatively, in bombers? It seems to be trending a lot that way lately, and I'm just curious if that's intentional or simply persistent oversight.
Why are you so buttmad about a broken mechanic being nerfed? You should be happy your theory crafters were able to figure out a means of breaking the game for a nice 2 year long period, and guess what? I bet those same theorycrafters are not buttmad, and are already on to the next thing. I will assume that you are just trolling here, but there are enough other buttmad N3 in this thread that it really makes me laugh.
At its core, this change doesnt really nerf the slow cat. You just need to sacrifice a little bit more DPS to run extra triggers, with a still very high alpha volley damage rate from 10 carriers striking as one, and just like in any other high volley damage fleet like Maelstroms, all you need to do is count to 3 to get that volley even if you do need to individually target things.
Your question about force multiplication is absolutely laughable. You still retain the idiotic rep power of your carriers, you still have the ability to field logi, to field the not yet nerfed t3 fleets, the ability to use your barley lost any supers and titans (in comparison with the total numbers that PL has) plus all of the other wonderful e-war that you can field at any given point. My god, can you not field Maulus alts like BL and Fweddit? Can you not bring a few extra brobirds on alt accounts like TEST? Are you too 1337 to bring some subcaps to a fight like... everyone else in this game?
This is about balance, and although I still think this is a very good troll, you can no longer use your carrier fleet as a unstopable swiss army knife. You need to choose a little more carefully on whether to commit your full online numbers to carriers, or to use them as an ancillary part of a fielded group of fleets.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2175
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:13:00 -
[617] - Quote
How about this; limit the starting amount of assisted drones by the size of the assisted ship. Frigates 5 Destroyers 10 Cruisers 15 Battlecruisers 20 Battleships 25 Capitals 25
Then add a skill that increases the amount by 20% per level. Novis Initiis is Recruting-á --á Ideas for Drone Improvement |
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:15:00 -
[618] - Quote
Not a bad resolution to people's clamoring. Far better than nerfing sentries.
Thank you. |
RDevz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
167
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:16:00 -
[619] - Quote
I've wanted to do this for years:
The tears, so delicious. Adapt or die.
~ |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1589
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:24:00 -
[620] - Quote
Now, if Fozzie had put ONE TENTH of this amount of explanation and justification in his thread about omnidirectional nerf, there would have been a lot less crying, anger, and confusion over that change. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
|
Hunter Arngrahm
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:28:00 -
[621] - Quote
Seems like a good change, now can you unnerf Omnidirectional Tracking Links to some degree? Pre-nerf they made any drone boat a capable Sentry platform, post nerf really only the Dominix and Ishtar are viable due to their inherit bonuses. I'm not saying they should be back the way they were by any means, but an extra 5% here and there would help unbonused ships be able to use sentries effectively. |
Kiry Belvar
BunkerBrigade
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:29:00 -
[622] - Quote
CFC is crying, CCP is changing!
Change the Game Name to CFC Online pleace |
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
160
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:29:00 -
[623] - Quote
Been reading thought his and considering the change they plan. After visiting Soul Crushing Lag a few times due to all the activity in system I can see the mad reasoning why CCP is doing a cap on drone assist. I like this idea very much.
Yes it will change Strategy of the slow cats, how incursion runners run fleets, and so on. Everyone should be happy they are not making it skill based for the drone bunny. If it was Me I would have done said that for each class of drone till you got to 50 or 100.
Hell I even thought that maybe CCP should put a drone assist bandwidth type thingy for ships.
Overall I like what they are planning it changes strategy and work on fleets will operate. Good luck |
Drakun Kugisa
We're Only in It for the Money
4
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:32:00 -
[624] - Quote
AetomHaert Mother wrote:Oh Takashawa wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Affect carriers more heavily than sub-caps (because they can field 10 drones per ship rather than 5) Can we take this as a sign, then, that CCP holds the opinion that capitals should offer even fewer advantages to offset the increased cost, effort, risk, and skills required to effectively field them, as compared to simply fielding big piles of subcaps? Also, a broader question - do you intend to leave any force multipliers in EVE, Rise, or simply reduce it to whoever has more dudes in T1 subcaps, or alternatively, in bombers? It seems to be trending a lot that way lately, and I'm just curious if that's intentional or simply persistent oversight.
|
Sheeana Harb
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
17
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:34:00 -
[625] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Now, if Fozzie had put ONE TENTH of this amount of explanation and justification in his thread about omnidirectional nerf, there would have been a lot less crying, anger, and confusion over that change.
This got me thinking and I would like to thank CCP Rise for all the effort he has in the original post, much appreciated. I liked it and am looking forward to similarly well-crafted explanation posts in the future.
Note: no sarcasm intended. |
Janeos
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
48
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:34:00 -
[626] - Quote
Kiry Belvar wrote:CFC is crying, CCP is changing!
Change the Game Name to CFC Online pleace I'd prefer EverGoon or World of GoonCraft. |
Gayas Allhell
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:37:00 -
[627] - Quote
Drakun Kugisa wrote:AetomHaert Mother wrote:Oh Takashawa wrote:CCP Rise wrote: Affect carriers more heavily than sub-caps (because they can field 10 drones per ship rather than 5) Can we take this as a sign, then, that CCP holds the opinion that capitals should offer even fewer advantages to offset the increased cost, effort, risk, and skills required to effectively field them, as compared to simply fielding big piles of subcaps? Also, a broader question - do you intend to leave any force multipliers in EVE, Rise, or simply reduce it to whoever has more dudes in T1 subcaps, or alternatively, in bombers? It seems to be trending a lot that way lately, and I'm just curious if that's intentional or simply persistent oversight.
A carrier is still a force multiplier, it has 20x the EHP and twice the repping power of a subcap logistics ship, and 10x the reps in triage. |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1711
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:39:00 -
[628] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:MeBiatch wrote:dei'ro wrote:rip 2000 drones shooting all at once. rip going afk during a fleetfight.
oh no now i actually have to play eve ;_;
thanks ccp yes now you can press f1 every 10 min in heavy tidi... totally see how that changes the afk thing. At least it actually lets ME pilot my ship and lets ME play the game I pay for Instead of SOMEONE ELSE. Whatever lets me do more with my ship then some Trigger handling I am for. Think about how much LESS tidi there will be and how many MORE ACTIVE players you can cram into a systems, put into these large Epic fights now before Tidi kicks in. the system to handle these fights has been greatly improved, lets keep items that break it out of it.
What stopped you from doing stuff before?
Or was your entire setup for drona assist and you didn't even bother to use nuets?
Well that is what I expected now instead of 4k people goons will bring 6k then complain about black screens and lag.
Ccp its not the ship or DA its game mechanics that offer zero diminishing returns and allow for unlimited players on grid that is the impetus for soul crushing lag. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... Winter Expansion new ship request |
Desert Ice78
Cobra Kai Dojo WHY so Seri0Us
339
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:41:00 -
[629] - Quote
Why do people think this is going to do anything about lag (or indeed believe the excuse that its going to help lag)?
Ignoring the fact that the change has nothing to do with lag, in the first instance there will potentially still be the same number of archons with the same number of sentries, with the same TiDi. Nothing changed. Second, even if there was less lag, they only consequence of that will be a bigger goon blob, with the result of the exact same lag as before.
This is about nerfing into the ground the only viable threat to CFC.
I'll just leave this here:
Quote:[14:48:37] directorbot: Drone assist is being limited to 50 drones per person. You may now spend the rest of the day posting like maniacs while trolling our various defeated foes. Enjoy yourselves, you've earned it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=319278Yes, this means we'll have to toss Dominixes into the dustbin and return to using some real goddamned warships once this hits. :toot: *** This was a broadcast from the_mittani to all-all at 2014-02-06 14:48:34.730289 EVE, replies are not monitored ***
I am a pod pilot: http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused. |
JD No7
V I R I I Ineluctable.
88
|
Posted - 2014.02.06 23:42:00 -
[630] - Quote
Just remove the assist mechanic. It's ********. |
|
|
|
|
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 .. 61 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |