Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 17:56:13 -
[61] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Richard Bong wrote:Why were you brought up in the CSM minutes? Perhaps for the excellent article suggestingn jump range changes that came out before the changes instituted in the game? You mean those changes which have made the game even more stagnant than it was before? Those changes which were supposed to have increased conflict but only resulted in coalitions becoming even more entrenched? I'm guessing you are talking about Pheobe and the Jump Fatigue mechanics. What need to be understood is the situation in null in regards to coalitions is it is not just power projection, but the way sov works that is keeping things slow in regards to change. What we currently have is the Dominion sov, which is actually an incomplete version of what was intended. Dominion sov requires an unholy amount of structure grinding to accomplish anything. Factor in instant structure damage notifications and any small group will have a tough time taking any sov from a coalition before they are able to sound the Horn of Gondor and everyone showing up.
My hope is that the new sov changes will be the opposite of soul crushing. I believe taking and defending sov should be mostly automatic and based around enjoyable activities. For a good while there has been a steady flow of ideas from the players on what these activities could be. Perhaps the sov in addition to a completely revamped POS feature would mean those select few who do logistics for hundreds and in some cases, thousands of players in their alliance no longer meant they were having to do things that murder their jump fatigue.
So when you combine a good sov system with the Jump Fatigue (which has many ways to adjust), THAT is when you will see the idea of a coalition like we see now become obsolete. Imagine your alliance having enough content for itself and no longer requiring 30,000 other players from dozens of other alliance to be able to hold a region or two? Only having to travel a handful of jumps to reach the front line.
There is still of course addressing the issue of industry related activities in null. Having to depend on shipping in so much from Jita is not good.
Which is why it is important to make sure those on the CSM are very keen about these issues and help guide CCP towards these things to help the players enjoy the game more. I strongly believe I am one of those candidates who should be on the CSM. I understand you have a mandate from up high to vote a specific way, but if you take a moment and think about your game play and what is best for it. I look forward to your vote.
The Paradox
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:08:45 -
[62] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:I that case...
What is your view on the: - coming corp and alliance revamp It is important for corp and alliance leadership not to be bogged down with arbitrary UI to do the most basic things needed. Which is something CCP are already neck deep in changing from my understanding. A CEO, director, logistics manager, as well as many other highly important roles to make a corp/alliance function should not require them to spend eons performing those tasks. They need to have a good amount of time to fly around and pew pew someone's face if they want. Basically they need to have fun too. Filling one of these roles is challenging enough as it is. Don't shackle them with unintuitive user interface as well.
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:- coming sov changes I explain a bit on my view for the coming sov changes and what I hope they will mean in the post above this reply.
The Paradox
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:25:46 -
[63] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Corey Lean wrote:Corey Lean wrote:I'll try phrasing my question another way: should people in a working group like the CSM with access to a non-public channel like skype or jabber have a reasonable expectation of privacy and be able to have candid and honest discourse about the game? Just for reference, the CSM does have this. Backed by the NDA. (which is a contract, with not insubstantial penalties for breaking it) Just want to point out I am happy such a thing exists and will gladly sign it. I work in the film industry and NDA is widely in place to protect a lot of things. From start to finish, people work extremely hard to present a film that (hopefully) is enjoyable for the target audience. My daily life is blanketed with NDA related stuff. It is nothing new for me.
The Paradox
|
Ackaroth
Plundering Penguins
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 18:33:56 -
[64] - Quote
+1
Flown with Marlona on a handful of occassions since meeting back in 07-08. He is a damn good pvper, content creator, and always been vocal about his thoughts on current meta (much of which has been good/constructive criticism).
Also he was the first person who I ever got the pleasure of recieving full commandship bonuses from, and weeeee that was fun. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16034
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 20:33:49 -
[65] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Richard Bong wrote:Why were you brought up in the CSM minutes? Perhaps for the excellent article suggestingn jump range changes that came out before the changes instituted in the game? You mean those changes which have made the game even more stagnant than it was before? Those changes which were supposed to have increased conflict but only resulted in coalitions becoming even more entrenched?
Is it opposite day where you are?
More has happened since the Phoebe changes were announced than in the 9 months before them. They are literally the best thing that CCP has ever done.
And I can tell you as a matter of fact that Marlona contributed to making them happen.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Corey Lean
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
62
|
Posted - 2015.01.31 20:37:54 -
[66] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:It is no secret that keeping the game stagnant is highly profitable for some groups and players. They believe the only important thing is the size of their epeen and would rather see the game wither and die than give up some of that wealth and power. So the idea that me, someone who is well known for doing extensive research, no matter how mundane fills them with fear. Someone who is willing to sacrifice the vast majority of their wealth to join in with thousand of other players in celebrating the ten year anniversary of EVE, has them shaking in their boots.
So they send the usual trolls my way. Orders to turn an anthill into a mountain. Attempt to discredit me and do everything in their power to keep me from getting on the CSM. They know that if I do, it will mean another person who will put the fun of other players above themselves. Someone who wants to see the end of these cancerous coalitions and the return of individual players having real control of their story instead of a couple power hungry sadists Can you elaborate on this a bit? I seem to recall a statement not long ago that was ratified by literally every major 0.0 alliance leader expressing dissatisfaction with the state of 0.0 and the need for change.
Post phoebe- every major power bloc has shrank its holdings and the size of its afk rental empire except your own alliance, which has doubled down on its holdings and collected even more rental property to become the largest afk isk generation operation in the history of EVE. |
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:05:13 -
[67] - Quote
Corey Lean wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:It is no secret that keeping the game stagnant is highly profitable for some groups and players. They believe the only important thing is the size of their epeen and would rather see the game wither and die than give up some of that wealth and power. So the idea that me, someone who is well known for doing extensive research, no matter how mundane fills them with fear. Someone who is willing to sacrifice the vast majority of their wealth to join in with thousand of other players in celebrating the ten year anniversary of EVE, has them shaking in their boots.
So they send the usual trolls my way. Orders to turn an anthill into a mountain. Attempt to discredit me and do everything in their power to keep me from getting on the CSM. They know that if I do, it will mean another person who will put the fun of other players above themselves. Someone who wants to see the end of these cancerous coalitions and the return of individual players having real control of their story instead of a couple power hungry sadists Can you elaborate on this a bit? I seem to recall a statement not long ago that was ratified by literally every major 0.0 alliance leader expressing dissatisfaction with the state of 0.0 and the need for change. Post phoebe- every major power bloc has shrank its holdings and the size of its afk rental empire except your own alliance, which has doubled down on its holdings and collected even more rental property to become the largest afk isk generation operation in the history of EVE. It is not AFK ISK generation when people have to form up and defend that rental space. Perhaps our rental program is vastly superior to the rest. I'm not a huge fan or swaths of rental empires. You would see these start to shrink if some things like structure notifications went away. It is really easy to know your losing rental space when the very moment it is attacked you are notified of it no matter where you are in the game.
The Paradox
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
531
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:14:16 -
[68] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:More has happened since the Phoebe changes were announced than in the 9 months before them. Only as a result of people adjusting to the changes. Since that initial shuffle to consolidate sovereignty things have been generally quiet. I went from having around one capital fleet a day to one to two every two weeks.
Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 00:29:41 -
[69] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Malcanis wrote:More has happened since the Phoebe changes were announced than in the 9 months before them. Only as a result of people adjusting to the changes. Since that initial shuffle to consolidate sovereignty things have been generally quiet. I went from having around one capital fleet a day to one to two every two weeks. Drop caps on targets closer?
The Paradox
|
Dagoth Fett
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 01:43:08 -
[70] - Quote
Also a wonderful dancer. |
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5945
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 01:58:59 -
[71] - Quote
Dagoth Fett wrote:Also a wonderful dancer. You said that would stay between us two.
The Paradox
|
Xenophilius Lovegood
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Triumvirate.
22
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 02:42:22 -
[72] - Quote
What is your position regarding LNAW, EVE's most illustrious corporation? |
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5946
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 03:26:16 -
[73] - Quote
Xenophilius Lovegood wrote:What is your position regarding LNAW, EVE's most illustrious corporation? I think Cas Mania should try harder in matching the rest of you when it comes to the family picture.
The Paradox
|
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1723
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 20:45:51 -
[74] - Quote
What about big vs small "organizations" thing
Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.
Akrasjel Lanate
General Director(CEO) of Naquatech Conglomerate
Executor of Naquatech Syndicate
Citizen of Solitude
|
Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect
579
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 21:04:15 -
[75] - Quote
+1 for leaks and the tears it created.
Hades Effect
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16048
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 21:04:26 -
[76] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:What about big vs small "organizations" thing
Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.
they already are. Running a coalition the size of the CFC or N3 is a gigantic amount of work, and there's a hell of a lot of organisational friction.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5946
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 21:55:29 -
[77] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:What about big vs small "organizations" thing
Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible. What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options.
I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization.
The Paradox
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16048
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 22:17:50 -
[78] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:What about big vs small "organizations" thing
Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible. What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options. I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization.
What do you think the qualifying size ought to be?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5946
|
Posted - 2015.02.01 22:29:56 -
[79] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:What about big vs small "organizations" thing
Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible. What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options. I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization. What do you think the qualifying size ought to be? 1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group).
Vote for Marlona Sky in the CSM 10 election!
Be sure to watch The Paradox, my PvP video.
|
HarlyQ
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
48
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 02:04:41 -
[80] - Quote
-20 not voting for loose lips. |
|
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
262
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 02:41:30 -
[81] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group).
Would you qualify Goonswarm Federation as a large active or inactive group?
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5947
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 02:56:29 -
[82] - Quote
captain foivos wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group). Would you qualify Goonswarm Federation as a large active or inactive group? If I had to pick one; considering their size in membership, I would lean on inactive. This of course fluctuates depending on the time of year and what is happening in game.
Vote for Marlona Sky in the CSM 10 election!
Be sure to watch The Paradox, my PvP video.
|
Xenophilius Lovegood
League of Non-Aligned Worlds Triumvirate.
23
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 03:23:43 -
[83] - Quote
LNAW endorses Marlona Sky; victory is assured. |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
185
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 08:10:16 -
[84] - Quote
Hello Marlona
What do you think should the balance be between ease of living/QOL and the ability for organizations to leverage the same mechanics on the strategic level.
For example, Jump drives/bridges allow players to move quickly between points. This can be used by individual players to bring their nullsec good to highsec for sale, for courier groups to make deliveries, and of course, for massive Supercapital fleets to smash many different targets across many regions (or used to).
Using that for an example, Jump fatigue both limited power projection and made it slower/more expensive to live in sov null. It's generally agreed that this is a good change, and the "collateral damage" to residents was well worth it. Is there a balance point where changes to mechanics use in sov-wars would impact "day-to-day" life too much to be worthwhile.
On a related note, how big should the "home-field advantage" be for defenders of sov, on a grand scale? on a tactical fleet fight scale? on a roaming scale?
An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5947
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 08:57:57 -
[85] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:What do you think should the balance be between ease of living/QOL and the ability for organizations to leverage the same mechanics on the strategic level.
For example, Jump drives/bridges allow players to move quickly between points. This can be used by individual players to bring their nullsec good to highsec for sale, for courier groups to make deliveries, and of course, for massive Supercapital fleets to smash many different targets across many regions (or used to).
Using that for an example, Jump fatigue both limited power projection and made it slower/more expensive to live in sov null. It's generally agreed that this is a good change, and the "collateral damage" to residents was well worth it. Is there a balance point where changes to mechanics use in sov-wars would impact "day-to-day" life too much to be worthwhile. This is a really good question. At the current state of null industry in regards to gathering resources within null, it is dire. The good news is CCP recognizes that. Right now, null depends on Jita. As much as it would like to walk away, it can't. That is why industry related ships, like haulers, freighters and such have a nice -90% bonus to Jump Fatigue. It means they can still perform the necessary trips to and from Jita to supply their efforts in null.
Once CCP is able to revamp industry side of gathering local resources to a level that makes sense, then such a bonus can be removed as it is no longer needed. I know moon goo is one of those things that is shipped to high sec and sold as an export, but I feel like that needs to be expanded upon. Even parts of low sec and maybe even high sec could have some things worthy fighting for and controlling. Such things could then be shipped into null. At the same time, it should be possible to find such items in other parts of the game, but no where near the occurrence in its native region.
There is near infinite possibilities that can be done to make null space very desirable while at the same time, not making it 100% self-sufficient. Trade is very important and creates opportunity's for conflict.
As far as taking something too far, the answer of course is yes. This goes for everything in the game. You have to find that balance. For any new mechanic or revamped one, having several options as 'slider' where CCP can easily make small adjustments here and there that is capable of evolving with the meta and player population. Jump Fatigue has several sliders that can be adjusted. As I have said before, as long as we get a sov system that is occupancy based, one that is not dependent on grinding structures and immediately notifying AFK empires their system is under attack; the Jump Fatigue will feel a lot better.
Right now everyone flocks to basically one major war front because anyone outside of a major coalition trying to take anything sends out a structure notification. Instantly. The defending coalition has an insane amount of time to mount a defense and repel the non-bloc force that is trying to take just one system. If having sov meant an alliance actually had to utilize the system at some capacity outside of stabbing a tower on a R64 - then we would see blocs and alliances begin to spread out across their territory. If they didn't, then their territory would shrink due to it being nibbled away at by groups at the borders.
And very important is it should not just be profitable to be active in these systems, but should be enjoyable to do so. Players do whatever it takes to have fun. Even if it means taking gates for 7 hours with capital ships to deploy to where the content is. The strain on their Jump Fatigue is soul crushing. But if the fun was only a handful of jumps away, you would not be stressing the Jump Fatigue left and right. There simply is no reason to cross regions at a time in a couple minutes to find what you are looking for when it is simply next door.
Then, we finally have a dozen or so different brush fire wars in null. Conflict spread across many, many server clusters... which of course means far less TiDi. Of course this does not bode well for those who like to sit on a throne having 40,000 players at their beck and call. After all - why would anyone follow someone who is in no position to aid them from the other side of the map? More leaders, more blood in null, more conflict, more pew pew.
Angry Mustache wrote:On a related note, how big should the "home-field advantage" be for defenders of sov, on a grand scale? on a tactical fleet fight scale? on a roaming scale? Jump Fatigue offers a huge home field advantage. While the invaders are having to slowly trudge their capital ships across systems to get to your front door, your capitals are already there. Some people complain that their capitals and supers were nerfed with Jump Fatigue, but they are looking at the glass half empty. As a defender using such toys, you can use them with the confidence that you will not be hot dropped by everyone and their brother from all four corners of the map in a couple minutes. This home field advantage scales up the larger the entity that inhabits the space obviously. Of course the more people you pack into one part of your territory, the more open you leave the rest for another group to start another front where you don't have your heavy hitters. You will need to balance your forces out between ensuring a successful defense of a system and maintaining control of the rest.
But capitals already on home defense under Jump Fatigue should not be the only thing out there that falls under "home field advantage." It could be something wild like deciding how you want a grid to function in regards to effects similar to unknown space. Perhaps the ability to lay mines because your alliance has sov? Again, near endless possibilities. But it should never be so over the top that opting to "blue ball" is the best option and you hope the invaders give up.
Vote for Marlona Sky in the CSM 10 election!
Be sure to watch The Paradox, my PvP video.
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5947
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 09:04:09 -
[86] - Quote
In the end defenders should want to fight. Even outnumbered and or outgunned, there should always be a way to engage the enemy at some capacity. Even if you still lose. Bombers originally (or so I thought) were meant to be a tool for those outnumbered had something to fight back when massively outnumbered. But, it just turned into another tool for the large blocs to use to oppress small non-bloc entities.
While there should be different things that fall under home field advantage, nothing should ever enable AFK empires. If they are not there using the space, there should be nothing for them to use to keep a very small group, even just a corp of 5 pilots, from taking it from them without them knowing about it.
Use it or lose it.
Vote for Marlona Sky in the CSM 10 election!
Be sure to watch The Paradox, my PvP video.
|
|
CCP Falcon
10574
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 15:45:39 -
[87] - Quote
I've restored a couple of posts into this thread, and edited a few more.
While criticism is fine, keep away from personal attacks, or your posteriors will be handed to you under the forum rules.
Keep it clean and civil people.
CCP Falcon || Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon
Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
|
|
captain foivos
State War Academy Caldari State
262
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 15:51:42 -
[88] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote:I've restored a couple of posts into this thread, and edited a few more. While criticism is fine, keep away from personal attacks, or your posteriors will be handed to you under the forum rules. Keep it clean and civil people.
You aren't my mom |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1038
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 16:00:45 -
[89] - Quote
Are you sure you want to take on the responsibility of a CSM. From what I understand, they tend to lose allot of playtime ingame.
Still you would be an excellent candidate.
Yaay!!!!
|
Marlona Sky
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
5948
|
Posted - 2015.02.02 17:07:35 -
[90] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Are you sure you want to take on the responsibility of a CSM. From what I understand, they tend to lose allot of playtime ingame.
Still you would be an excellent candidate. I am perfectly fine with this.
Vote for Marlona Sky in the CSM 10 election!
Be sure to watch The Paradox, my PvP video.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |