Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13090
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:36:00 -
[361] - Quote
Fozzie, stop trolling.
signatures are a "dumb" mechanic. they're not broken... they're just 'dumb'. wormhole gameplay depends on scan signatures and suffers as a result.
from what I can tell, you have the relationship between the two switched, and are convinced that wormholes should get it in the bum bum.
as it is, signatures show up to everyone system-wide, immediately, and this needs to change. if you fix signature mechanics in wormholes, you fix them everywhere.
...and if you don't fix signature mechanics, you can make a cool UI like sensor overlay and a Dscan slider, but signatures will remain 'dumb'.
your proposed idea of delaying signatures is bad though, just to be clear. it's merely another layer of 'dumb' placed over a deeper level of 'dumb'
fleshing out signature mechanics
some variables would allow you to balance signatures. a signature needs to do things like:
1. appear in on-board scans within a limited radius from itself, instead of automatically to everyone in system. like ships currently do on dscan. while you're at it, make the default dscan range on ships care about the size of the detected ship vs the scan res of the ship requesting information about its surroundings.
volume of the k162's detection sphere compared to the volume of spheres in which signatures can spawn and players can fly = a reduction in instant awareness that you can measure.
2. take into account the size of the k162 make some appear in a larger radius than others. scaling the intel benefit of a k162 based on the thread that could come through it sounds good, i think.
3. take into account the security level of the system (and in the case of wormholes, the class this is accomplished currently, to a degree.
4. take into account a ship's scan resolution another way to limit signature visability is take into account a ship's scan res if the ship's scan res is not high enough, it will not detect a signature without probes.
other things you can do:
5. reduce the active time on scan probes to 10 mins (or something). they never needed to live that long.
lastly, I'm disappointed to see you call scan probes a 'trick'. in my mind, tricks in EVE are things like mineral compression using guns, or self-destruct cynos.
so I wonder, what did you intend wormholes to be like, if spamming scan probes or the probe scan "show" button is a 'trick'.
wormholes are meant to be different, I get that. 'no-local' and 'no exits in overview by default' is proof that you intended for something else to happen in them, but I never thought signature watching was a 'trick'.
without local or system exits in overview, D-scan and probe scan are simply the next best thing available for situational awareness in wormholes.
tl;dr:
signature mechanics are flat and dumb President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
4
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:39:00 -
[362] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:Gustava Risalo wrote:There is one inherent problem with all of this hurf blurf about Risk vs reward. You gain the ability to roll holes unannounced until you find a nice target you can kill then you have the suprise factor on your side for killing them.
Where is your risk?
You get to pick your targets so you aren't going to take on anything your gang can't handle. You aren't going to roll holes without having the majority of your fleet on standby and have a fairly accurate idea of fleet composition. So where is your risk? You get nothing but the rewards of the kills and the fact that you can make even more isk when you run sites.
Also don't feed me the bs about how you will engange anything or you won't pick a fight you won't win. Thats a load of garbage. Yeah, pvpers never risk their ships by warping into a sleeper site full without full knowledge of their opponent. When you try to kill someone in sleeper site you don't know how many people they have logged off in their system, you don't know how many capital ships they can bring in on a moments notice. Yes, ganks will still happen but to say that pvp oriented players don't have a risk when they initiate a fight is ridiculous.
under the new system u have 5 mins to gather perfect intel b4 they even know your there yeah totally balanced. Get rid of the stupid discovery changes and give us back the balanced system we had b4. tbh 70% of the holes I used to jump into with ppl farming there were no probes out. Most of the time probe spammers are in caps and stuck for a set time anyway. Just getting rid of discovery scan is enuf. yeah probe spam is boring to do that's why a lot of ppl just don't do it.........not to mention if I roll my hole and decide I don't like what I see on the other side I can just roll it again without ever having to worry about it being scanned down..........this is just ccp trying to say there was always a problem and it wasn't their system that broke things when in reality their system broke wh pvp. now they want to see if they mess it up even more. |
NinjaTurtle
Carte Blanche. Trading
61
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:42:00 -
[363] - Quote
yeah you really don't need probes out to see new sigs, just hit 'show' at the bottom (the button that restores hidden sigs) and if there's a new sig present the list will refresh. It's basically the exact same thing as pumping d-scan. Literally. Co-host and editor of Declarations of War Podcast http://declarationsofwar.com Twitter- @schertt |
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc.
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:45:00 -
[364] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:Yeah, pvpers never risk their ships by warping into a sleeper site full without full knowledge of their opponent. When you try to kill someone in sleeper site you don't know how many people they have logged off in their system, you don't know how many capital ships they can bring in on a moments notice. Yes, ganks will still happen but to say that pvp oriented players don't have a risk when they initiate a fight is ridiculous.
It's all about risk management. What do the the people running the sites do to manage their risk? The answer 'have more people' tends to lead in one direction.
Scanning for ships is not a particularly great alternative - by the time you hit something it'll be in warp already. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
363
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:46:00 -
[365] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote:A mass/time delay would resolve the following issues a time-only delay leaves unsolved:
Carebears can't roll their holes in perfect safety. If a hole is time-limited only, some carebears good with rolling ships can hop in and out inside the timer, and the hungry PvPers they've inadvertently rolled into have no opportunity to attempt a gank or slip a scanning alt through. It wouldnt. Sig would show only once the caps jumped through and the residents would need to: notice it, scan it, warp to it, scout it, put fleet together, jump through <- all that before the crashing capitals jump back through the K162 and close it behind them (which takes roughly 2 seconds). I dare say its not very likely.
But you are correct that the other issues would be alleviated somewhat. It would also force people to use covops for scouting fresh holes instead of T3s, which im not sure if its good or bad...
Either way it doesnt really address more fuddamental needs and all the other (much less controversial) suggestions which I summed up in my wall of text about the need for increased interaction instead of isolation.
W-Space Realtor |
SambaSol
Veritas Theory
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:47:00 -
[366] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote: Carebears can't roll their holes in perfect safety. If a hole is time-limited only, some carebears good with rolling ships can hop in and out inside the timer, and the hungry PvPers they've inadvertently rolled into have no opportunity to attempt a gank or slip a scanning alt through.
It maintains the freedom from probe spamming and increased risk to the defenders (who are now alerted when the fleet is jumping in, not when the scout first warps to the hole) without adverse side effects introduced by the pure delay, and the complexity issues fit easily with the rest of wormhole space mechanics.
From my experience, what this means is carebears for C5's and C6's will either instapop the hole with a dread and orca, or POS up if they don't have the resources to do so. In the end, this will just make things horrible for people who have no alternative but battleships and orcas, and leave those of us with access to capitals with little to no change as far as rolling holes...
Just a crazy thought, but the biggest thing I hate about WH PVP is trying to get my pod back into the WH when I lose.... Perhaps a quick and simple way to make fights more common would be to give pods immunity to bubbles in w-space? With limits obviously, maybe just after being ejected from the ship so they can still be caught with bubbles as they try to make it home. If they're less likely to be stuck out of their home system for a significant length of time, they'll be more likely to risk PVP imho. |
Gnaw LF
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
643
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:48:00 -
[367] - Quote
Deeone wrote:under the new system u have 5 mins to gather perfect intel b4 they even know your there yeah totally balanced. Get rid of the stupid discovery changes and give us back the balanced system we had b4. tbh 70% of the holes I used to jump into with ppl farming there were no probes out. Most of the time probe spammers are in caps and stuck for a set time anyway. Just getting rid of discovery scan is enuf. yeah probe spam is boring to do that's why a lot of ppl just don't do it.........not to mention if I roll my hole and decide I don't like what I see on the other side I can just roll it again without ever having to worry about it being scanned down..........this is just ccp trying to say there was always a problem and it wasn't their system that broke things when in reality their system broke wh pvp. now they want to see if they mess it up even more.
No one said 5 minutes, there is no mention of 5 minutes anywhere. Right now we are talking about the delay in general, the details of the duration are not even being addressed. I think 2 minutes or less is still good enough of a change.
|
na'Vi Ronuken
Louis Nothing And Nobody
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:51:00 -
[368] - Quote
This is such a bad idea because it gives such a huge advantage to the attackers. Imagine if a blackops drop in Kspace was undetectable until they were ongrid with you (and you can't see cyno alts coming in because no local) and you CANT leave for ~5 mins AFTER you detact the blackops drop because of triage/siege.
The current state of affairs for farmers in WH might be a bit strong - but its no worse than the hundreds of billions Nullsec rakes in from their renter empires. CCP should spend time making NS more interesting - not messing with WHs which is currently far less broken than Low/High/Null sec. |
Dersen Lowery
Laurentson INC StructureDamage
1072
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:52:00 -
[369] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:No one said 5 minutes, there is no mention of 5 minutes anywhere. Right now we are talking about the delay in general, the details of the duration are not even being addressed. I think 2 minutes or less is still good enough of a change.
If by "no one," you mean "Two Step," then yes. Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables. |
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
4
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:52:00 -
[370] - Quote
Stitcher wrote:Nothing wrong with it from our perspective, sure, but Fozzie said they wanted a design which wouldn't encourage probe spam, and anything which reduces RSI and doesn't eat into the lifespan of my left-click is welcome
Besides, with good D-scanning it's hard for, say, a gang of cloaky ambush tech3s to sneak through a K162 unnoticed anyway. Only marginally less so than if you have eyes on it. So I don't really see that the inability of the "defending" side to pick it up instantly would make that big an impact on their odds of getting caught and ganked.
In any case, as things stand there's a minimum time between when the wormhole spawns and when anybody can scan it down anyway, so if you only spawn it when you've got a fleet ready to blitz through...
I don't see that it would change much, is my point. Good and disciplined corps would just adapt, find a new way to gather the same intel and all that the development effort would accomplish is forcing the players to do more clicking to get more or less the same result. And the guys who aren't smart enough to adapt like that are already getting caught with their pants down anyway.
Now if you want to propose that both the K162 AND any ships that come through it should be invisible to both probes and D-scan for, say, twenty minutes and one minute (during that 20 minutes) respectively, then that might genuinely increase the amount of uncertainty and fog-of-war in W-space. Newly-spawned K162s might in that case pose a genuine threat to the security of anything in that system regardless of how vigilant they're being. The proposal as floated without the ships also inheriting some kind of invisibility still leaves open loopholes that would cause nothing to really change.
so instead of having probes in space I should just have to have an alt in d scan range of a randomly spawning wh........that makes a lot of sense.......jesus I guess ppl would just stop using large systems.........and you ppl do realize that a new k162 is already wont show up till it gets jumped thru the first time right??? If u roll a brand new hole u have plenty of time b4 it opens on the other side if no one jumps thru........ |
|
Legion40k
ZOMBIEBEACHPARTYPATROL Sex Panther.
67
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:53:00 -
[371] - Quote
so..if I'm rolling my static and end up opening into a larger entity i can't fight I'd be able to..roll the static
they wouldn't even know i was there, or be able to do anything before im crashing the hole
rolling shouldn't be risk free.. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
67
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:54:00 -
[372] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:Deeone wrote:under the new system u have 5 mins to gather perfect intel b4 they even know your there yeah totally balanced. Get rid of the stupid discovery changes and give us back the balanced system we had b4. tbh 70% of the holes I used to jump into with ppl farming there were no probes out. Most of the time probe spammers are in caps and stuck for a set time anyway. Just getting rid of discovery scan is enuf. yeah probe spam is boring to do that's why a lot of ppl just don't do it.........not to mention if I roll my hole and decide I don't like what I see on the other side I can just roll it again without ever having to worry about it being scanned down..........this is just ccp trying to say there was always a problem and it wasn't their system that broke things when in reality their system broke wh pvp. now they want to see if they mess it up even more. No one said 5 minutes, there is no mention of 5 minutes anywhere. Right now we are talking about the delay in general, the details of the duration are not even being addressed. I think 2 minutes or less is still good enough of a change.
No one? several people have suggested 5 minutes plus or minus two minutes. That's one of the most common numbers I've seen thrown around in this thread. |
SAMA SANCHAN
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:56:00 -
[373] - Quote
I agree with this potential change and I'll tell you why in a moment.
I'm a c5 dweller that depends on the isk that I make running sites with my Corp to fund my pvp in all arenas eve has to offer. I understand the lucrative aspects of wormhole life exist because of the significant amount of risk involved. And, I think that this is what Fozzie is trying to get at... due to the current trends if wormholers the risk is being averted through careful scouting. But, Fozzie asks us now if these methods are too secure.
The darkness of the woods have been feared so long that we have a natural fear of them in life because our predators had the advantage.
This change might scare off the risk averse but for those who welcome the challenge; I say you belong in this space.
If it were up to me I would introduce this change carefully. With c1 k162's having different attributes than those in a c6. You can even change the wormhole exit names for varying classes. All im saying is c1 dwellers didnt sign up for the same risk as those in ac6. People in a c6 or c5 should be feeling the stress and placing the scouts at each set of planets.
Like i said this would scare off a bunch of folk from wh space. So prices would change and having the extra manpower for scouting might be feasible, having a few falcons cloaked for security, etc. This is what I feel wh space should be like. Real danger.
that's my 10
cheers |
na'Vi Ronuken
Louis Nothing And Nobody
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:57:00 -
[374] - Quote
[/quote]
Yeah, pvpers never risk their ships by warping into a sleeper site full without full knowledge of their opponent. When you try to kill someone in sleeper site you don't know how many people they have logged off in their system, you don't know how many capital ships they can bring in on a moments notice. Yes, ganks will still happen but to say that pvp oriented players don't have a risk when they initiate a fight is ridiculous. [/quote]
Yo - if they had dreads logged off in the system it would be on the site with them to make the site running faster. so YES you can say with a high degree of certainty how many caps they have and how many people they got. |
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
158
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:57:00 -
[375] - Quote
+1
I am in favor more randomization and anything that increases risk in wormholes.
If I have 5-6 minutes of stealth of look around with a buzzard and decide if i want to prep a cap trap or cloaky bubbler or whatnot, I am all in favor.
Also,
DELAY IN LOCAL WHEN ENTERING NULLSEC FROM WORMHOLES - im sick and tired of losing carrier and botter kills. |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate
1272
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:07:00 -
[376] - Quote
Plenty of people died running pve sites BEFORE the discovery scanner change. I don't understand the "fix what's not broken" mentality. No trolling please |
Hedge Fox
Leverage Investments
42
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:10:00 -
[377] - Quote
CCP Development Plan: Focus on ISK-sink creation. We need to blow up more ISK so we can sell more PLEX. |
Julius Caeserr
Slightly Darker Black Ops Divide By Zero Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:12:00 -
[378] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: This change would make life in wormholes a bit less safe, and increase the sense of real danger that unknown space should include. The flipside is that actively hunting for pvp in wormholes should present more targets that have a slightly shorter notice to your arrival. -Fozzie
You're kidding right? As someone who lives in a WH on and off (C2) I can tell you there is more than enough of a sense of "real danger", and nothing about living in a WH is safe. If anything there is too much real danger. Now that cosmic signatures do not need to be scanned down in order to warp to them (thanks for that, by the way...) those of us living in WHs get little to no notice when someone warps in on us and ruins our day. We already are having to spam D-scan to try to get the couple seconds of notice that helps us stay alive, and you want to make it easier for the people trying to find and kill us? I don't always want to PvP guys. Sometimes I want to be able to run the content you've done a good job of creating for us inside the WH. Otherwise, why don't you just remove all the signature content and make it a pure PVP realm. You keep making changes forcing those of us that live there to go that direction anyway.
-1 |
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
29
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:13:00 -
[379] - Quote
I don't get that either, Bane.
Why not fix the real issue: C5 farmers! Change these cap escalations that you can't run em with only 5 ppl. !!! |
Ravcharas
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
290
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:14:00 -
[380] - Quote
Hedge Fox wrote:CCP Development Plan: Focus on ISK-sink creation. We need to blow up more ISK so we can sell more PLEX. How is this an isk sink? |
|
Alundil
Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate
436
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:25:00 -
[381] - Quote
na'Vi Ronuken wrote: Yo - if they had dreads logged off in the system it would be on the site with them to make the site running faster. so YES you can say with a high degree of certainty how many caps they have and how many people they got.
This is very very wrong. Clone mechanics enchancements Deep Space Probe Revival |
BoBoZoBo
Paragon Fury Tactical Narcotics Team
396
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:28:00 -
[382] - Quote
mkint wrote:lol, first you add sensor overlay, then you make it mandatory because 90% of your players would shut it off altogether and that doesn't look good on a resume, and now you're realizing it's causing problems? Who'da thunk.
I'm not a WH dweller, but it makes sense to me to have no sensor overlay at all outside of empire space or maybe even have it highsec-only, especially in w-space. It removes the exploration part of exploration.
From a logical point of view, a wormhole is a wormhole. Why should it make a difference in what end it's being probed out? It's already leaning in favor of whoever's on the other side because they'll already be at 0m to the wormhole and the k162 side would still need to be probed out. The aggressors already have a time advantage.
edit: and isn't the no local supposed to be the make-it-easy-for-bored-nullbear-aggressors factor?
As someone who was a WH dweller - THIS right here. What you are describing is a symptom of a problem YOU guys created with over-reaching probe and overview changes, and are now trying to swim upstream to "fix" a problem that isn't really even there (what is the real game-breaking problem here exactly?). It's madness.
Why introduce some other artificial timer for only ONE side of the wormhole. I hate to call ideas terrible, but this is. Entering entity already has the advantage which has been proven by countless killmails.
Solution - none needed, leave it alone... or fix the ROOT cause of these symptoms. Primary Test Subject GÇó SmackTalker Elite |
NinjaTurtle
Carte Blanche. Trading
61
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:33:00 -
[383] - Quote
SAMA SANCHAN wrote: All im saying is c1 dwellers didnt sign up for the same risk as those in a c6. People in a c6 or c5 should be feeling the stress and placing the scouts at each set of planets.
this dude strikes an interesting point; there's a general sense that say, a c2 is 'safer' than the c6 when in fact they have a lot of identical mechanics and are ~basically~ at the same level of dangerous, using unbonused stars in this train of thought (cause there sure are enough of them). The wormholes operate mostly in the same way, just with mass restrictions. Sites, statics, planets, stars, no local, all of these things/concepts operate and function in the same way. The only thing that scales with the Class is difficulty of PVE sites. Inherently, does that mean the reason the C6 is "dangerous" in the first place is because you most likely have a larger, more organized, better equipped group of people living in that C6 compared to the C2? Kind of, I think. The small guys still face an unproportional amount of risk existing in WH space. Co-host and editor of Declarations of War Podcast http://declarationsofwar.com Twitter- @schertt |
Alisyana
Trans Secunda Nulli Secunda
113
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:43:00 -
[384] - Quote
I'll say it again:
1. Remove d-scan. 2. Remove scan overlay.
Use probes to find ships, sigs, etc.
I'll explain this a bit. All I see is incessant whining about how there's no good fights, everyone bluebells, there no conflict driver, and the only real PVP is straight up ganks. It was that way 4 years ago, it's the same now. The straight up gank isn't pvp - it's the furthest thing from it, no different from ganking a cyno ship on a station, or a hauler in lowsec.
It's no fun when you know you're guaranteed to win, unless your self esteem is so low you need that repeated jolt to tell yourself how elite you are. So if you want to increase the chances of a "random" meeting of ships, get rid of the tools they use every day to decide "not" to engage. How many fights are passed on, because you don't have enough in fleet, or don't think you can take on what you see on d-scan? So make it harder, and more intensive to find out. Sure, display what's on scan with combat probes, but now you have some work to do.
I spend 2+ years with TL, and most of the fights we had were straight up ganks. Find some Tengu's running a C4, watch them while we gather up 15-20 guys (because no one wants to get left out, right?), and **** them. Meh. Not a lot of fun.
Roam around with a 20-man fleet, run into a 10-man fleet, they run and reship into a 40-man fleet, and come back. Do you fight? Probably not. The issue is because you know what they have, you won't fight unless you think you can win. And when everyone escalates - no one wins. If you can't d-scan, you either fight or flee - you still have those choices, but how you base those decisions is now on how well you can evaluate a combat scan, and how well you know your targets.
By point of contrast to show how "safe" things are, w-space lacks the one thing that makes the null fleets uncertain, no matter what the numbers: A Cyno. You can have a 200-man fleet sieging an ihub, but in the blink of an eye a cyno can change that dynamic and now you are outnumbered, out positioned, and outgunned. W-space doesn't have that, so you roll around looking for the gank you know you can win, and the only thing that can tip that balance is how many people they can log on to fight you with before you kill off what you have locked down. It's relative safety, for both sides. No, I'm not advocating cyno's in w-space, but you need to remove the "certainty" and re-institute the "unknown" and I think every one would have more fun.
You want scary, unknown, dangerous space? Then push for it. Definition of "SD" (Self Destruct) = "It's like running up to someone to kick them in the balls, they see you and proceed to kick themselves in the balls, and then laugh at you for denying someone a chance to kick them in the balls." -á- Celery Man |
SKINE DMZ
Stay Frosty.
339
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:54:00 -
[385] - Quote
Get rid of sensor overlay but if I'm scanning I want the accurate results, no delay there that is a shabby fix/adjustment. I disagree |
r Cubed
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
9
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:59:00 -
[386] - Quote
If you want to add delay, add it across the board(d-scan, discovery scan, distance from probes to signature).... perhaps using the speed of light as a reference, at-least this would make sense. Down side, you'd wait over an hour to know that somethings changed at the edge of your d-scan range. ^^^But you'll prob never hear the end of complaints from that, so more realistically \/ \/ \/
Ax the discovery scanners updating signatures, we have probes for a reason o.0 Leave the rest of it alone, simple, problem solved
When a K162 spawns it is a Signature, probes detect signatures. If it's not probable it doesn't exist yet. |
Schwa Nuts
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:10:00 -
[387] - Quote
Two step wrote:No, the hilarious part is the nullsec farmers coming out and complaining about losing ships to logoff gangs.
You don't know anything about me and are making bad assumptions based off my corp tag. I am not complaining, just stating fact to counter to the argument that it is "risk-free farming."
Additionally, while I have great respect for the big w-space pvp alliances, it is quite obvious that such a change benefits them more than anyone else. Those that suggest this change would lower w-space population are right. |
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
424
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:20:00 -
[388] - Quote
Alisyana wrote:Wormhole........ A Cyno.
No.
And for the first time ever I don't have to explain why :-P
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Hedge Fox
Leverage Investments
43
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:23:00 -
[389] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:Hedge Fox wrote:CCP Development Plan: Focus on ISK-sink creation. We need to blow up more ISK so we can sell more PLEX. How is this an isk sink?
When ships blow up, ISK vanishes in varying quantities. Some may get looted or salvaged, but a percentage of it is removed from circulation entirely. Thus, ISK Sink.
Enabling more mechanics making defensive strategies less effective, would in affect, indirectly consequent in more ships lost, thus adding to the ISK sinks.
Much like making interceptors immune to bubbles and increasing warp speeds for them, makes them prime hunters in 0.0 to catch ratters. More death, more money for CCP. |
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
424
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:27:00 -
[390] - Quote
Schwa Nuts wrote:Two step wrote:No, the hilarious part is the nullsec farmers coming out and complaining about losing ships to logoff gangs. You don't know anything about me and are making bad assumptions based off my corp tag. I am not complaining, just stating fact to counter to the argument that it is "risk-free farming." Additionally, while I have great respect for the big w-space pvp alliances, it is quite obvious that such a change benefits them more than anyone else. Those that suggest this change would lower w-space population are right.
I'm inclined to agree. This is a power shift in the wrong way. It should not be (roll hole, find target, gank pve wimp with gang, roll hole, find target, gank...).
This is blowing the whole concept of a roam if all you do is sit and roll holes (it ain't exploration, you just turn wormhole space into the WOW Dungeon Group Finder).
If you want combat, you have to make wormhole space itself have a value. At that point, people will want to TAKE YOUR WORMHOLE away. It sucks to say that what wormhole space needs is a structure grind, but it does, but that Structure Grind has to provide an actual point and/or value (right now, the only reason to grind pos's is to evict people). This is a completely different topic though.
We want combat and a purpose. Wormholes need a value, once it has that, there is no real need to worry about signature delays, auto cloaking holes, because people will come in to fight or to cause fights.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |