Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Aeon Veritas
Lobach Inc. Easily Offended
16
|
Posted - 2015.07.22 12:32:04 -
[241] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Reserved for future Q&A =) I think this post needs to be updated
Q: Why? Did you listen to some of the community feedback?
Especially for threads like this the forum needs "next DEV post" / "previous DEV post" buttons. The "first DEV post" is just plain useless here...
General module tiericide thoughts
|
Grzegorz Wu
Thou shalt not kill A Nest of Vipers
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.22 15:26:51 -
[242] - Quote
Montgomery Black wrote:If you could broadcast a probe result as a warp to that will help the WH community alot.
Currently we we use fleet warps to
- Catch site runners at signatures. Eg combat probe, then fleet/squad warp a sabre on top of the result. Without fleetwarp or a warpto broadcast the site runners will escape 90% of the time if they are actively dscaning. Because by the time u land ur cov-ops on grid at the site and then get a sabre to warp to it, the site runners have seen the probes or the new wh sig you came from and are gone.
We just need the ability to get a sabre or other ship with some reasonable tackle ability on grid quickly. This is not about getting the blob there its just about getting the intial tackle.
|
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
93
|
Posted - 2015.07.25 11:19:03 -
[243] - Quote
(copyed from another part off forum: We tried to fix bombers by nerfing bombers and everyone went nuts, so we stopped that and instead tried to nerf them by nerfing multiboxers. That didn't work either so now were going to fix them by nerfing fleet warp. ) |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
87
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 03:28:25 -
[244] - Quote
Here's a thought or three.
Remove local.
Ban Intel channels.
Remove fleet tools.
Install One hundred Wormholes in each system, For content provision obviously.
Remove Warp from ships,
Nerf tanks to zero, oh and remove Armor and Shield reps.
And just for the hell of it, lets all not be able to use Comms at all.
That should make EVE really interesting again for players.
Seriously though CCP why all the negative attitude towards players these days.
Own nothing, Build nothing, Plan nothing, Just blow it all up, you know it makes perfect sense, Fozzie says so.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
610
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 07:26:56 -
[245] - Quote
marly cortez wrote:Seriously though CCP why all the negative attitude towards players these days.
Fairly simple problem inherent to game design, really:
CCP has X brains working on making the game.
Players have Y brains working on trying to find and exploit (in the non-bannable sense) the most efficient, cost-effective ways of doing pretty much everything they need to do.
Y > X
Y > X*1000
This means the devs are inherently at a massive disadvantage - no matter how many brains they devote to making things less automated and more participatory (or what they think will be so), we're putting at least a few dozen to a few hundred times that many brains on finding the best ways we make it possible for people to be effective with minimal effort. Because we want as many people to be effective as possible, so we have a better chance of winning any given battle. And we want those people to have as easy a time being effective, because people are lazy, and if they have to do more than the absolute minimum, 90% of people - including 90% of the people in this game - won't.
Now add in the sandbox element where they're literally trying to give us a universe where we can do pretty much 'whatever', as opposed to a much more linear, channeled progression and limited industry/economy model like normal MMOs, and you've made their job that much harder.
Soooo... yeah. Basically, we're massive pains in their butts. |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
418
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 08:00:59 -
[246] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:marly cortez wrote:Seriously though CCP why all the negative attitude towards players these days. Fairly simple problem inherent to game design, really: CCP has X brains working on making the game. Players have Y brains working on trying to find and exploit (in the non-bannable sense) the most efficient, cost-effective ways of doing pretty much everything they need to do. Y > X Y > X*1000 This means the devs are inherently at a massive disadvantage - no matter how many brains they devote to making things less automated and more participatory (or what they think will be so), we're putting at least a few dozen to a few hundred times that many brains on finding the best ways we make it possible for people to be effective with minimal effort. Because we want as many people to be effective as possible, so we have a better chance of winning any given battle. And we want those people to have as easy a time being effective, because people are lazy, and if they have to do more than the absolute minimum, 90% of people - including 90% of the people in this game - won't. Now add in the sandbox element where they're literally trying to give us a universe where we can do pretty much 'whatever', as opposed to a much more linear, channeled progression and limited industry/economy model like normal MMOs, and you've made their job that much harder. Soooo... yeah. Basically, we're massive pains in their butts.
Could not have said it better myself. Even the best and the brightest are no match for sheer numbers of brains. At least in this context.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
87
|
Posted - 2015.07.27 11:55:13 -
[247] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Arrendis wrote:[quote=marly cortez]Seriously though CCP why all the negative attitude towards players these days. Fairly simple problem inherent to game design, really: CCP has X brains working on making the game. Players have Y brains working on trying to find and exploit (in the non-bannable sense) the most efficient, cost-effective ways of doing pretty much everything they need to do. Y > X Y > X*1000 - including 90% of the people in this game - won't. Now add in the sandbox element where they're literally trying to give us a universe where we can do pretty much 'whatever', as opposed to a much more linear, channeled progression and limited industry/economy model like normal MMOs, and you've made their job that much harder. Soooo... yeah. Basically, we're massive pains in their butts.
Agreed overall with your concise analysis of EVE as a problem child, what I as a CeO am more concerned about here is that 90% factor with currently players not only exhibiting resistance to engagement with so called 'FozzieSov' other than exploratory short lived interest, They quickly realize the futile nature of the change and take to simply not logging in at all, 'Dog chasing tail syndrome' Gets very old very quickly in the view of many so not worth pursuit.
This latest round of proposed changes is even more concerning in that it eats into the foundation of basic fleet activities that players have relied on in years past using the incorrect metric that players need this change so they can exhibit the skills required to engage in fleets on any level, Something any FC crew worth it's salt will quickly realize is simply not going to happen resulting in Less rather than more fleet participation, A position that Alliances and Corporations have been taking great pains over the past months trying to avoid with little lasting success.
As for the 'Sandbox' ideal, This one has always baffled me but no matter, the question here is who's sandbox is it now, Not the players that for certain, they never really had control of that aspect and even less so these days since the change to more frequent game updates were what so many of us feared the most has actually come to fruition with CCP pressured by schedules are introducing changes to the game not for any other other reasoning than to tick boxes on a time line, a situation that has brought us to were we are today far quicker and with less thought to the overall impact on the game than the original yearly iterations once offered.
Constant tinkering with minor aspects of the game has detracted from game content satisfaction for many, The need to revisit so many items so often leads to the thought that maybe CCP needs to take a step back and place more emphasis on getting it right first time so allowing time for changes to be properly assessed over longer periods because EVE is not all about the numbers, beyond that, Take away the buckets and spades from any sandbox and what your left with is a pile of dirt and little else.
Own nothing, Build nothing, Plan nothing, Just blow it all up, you know it makes perfect sense, Fozzie says so.
|
davet517
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
111
|
Posted - 2015.07.28 10:51:44 -
[248] - Quote
Just tweak mobile scan inhibitors to make them a little fleet friendlier, and less farmer friendly. Shorter activation time, shorter lifespan. Maybe adjust the range a little bit. Providing the ability to counter something with skillful play is always going to be more fun than just taking that thing away.
To counter the counter, and an enemy sniper fleet, an FC will have to bring some snipers of his own, to kill the enemy inhibitors. Makes sniper fleets more viable again, and makes mono-min-max fleets less so, and it does it without all of the unintended consequences that removing fleet warp introduces. |
Cuddly Cutie
Dumb Ways to Die
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 13:48:41 -
[249] - Quote
I'm a Miner, an there are Point im not happy with, "You can not Fleetwarp to Bookmarks" so my Lovely Miner fleet rest in peace, in future it is not possible to warp to savespots, or to a POS, you can just set a warp-to, and make each account a 10 klick follow to warp challange, what is meaning R.I.P Acc2 - Acc3 - Acc4 ... .
I hope CCP is sometimes thinking about EvE-Online and not only about PvP.
Please keap in mind, EvE is more than destroying things, and looking for good fights. |
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards FUBAR.
682
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 23:48:25 -
[250] - Quote
Cuddly Cutie wrote:I'm a Miner, an there are Point im not happy with, "You can not Fleetwarp to Bookmarks" so my Lovely Miner fleet rest in peace, in future it is not possible to warp to savespots, or to a POS, you can just set a warp-to, and make each account a 10 klick follow to warp challange, what is meaning R.I.P Acc2 - Acc3 - Acc4 ... .
I hope CCP is sometimes thinking about EvE-Online and not only about PvP.
Please keap in mind, EvE is more than destroying things, and looking for good fights. Had you not realized, the whole idea behind fleet warp changes is to make solo mining and PVE gangs easier to catch? Either that or CCP didn't really think about the consequences of this change when combined with, The Power of Two "never fly alone" promotions. These promotions should now be removed from Account Management. It will soon be false advertising with yet another nerf to multiboxing.
The coming change does nothing more than make sniper fleets even harder to deal with, unless all you fly is sniper fleets. CCP again missed the boat by going too far with change, where minor tweaks would have worked far better, they went for a full nerf.
NB; I believe the goal is to see how few single account subscribers CCP can survive with. That can't be good for a game that has for its entire life promoted and encouraged multiboxing.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator
|
|
Vol Arm'OOO
Bagel and Lox
712
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 16:26:22 -
[251] - Quote
Bad idea is a Bad Idea. The change needlessly hurts multi-boxers for no good reason.
If combat probing has made sniper fleets less viable that is only because CCP made probing too easy. Once upon a time, probing used to be a challenge that required real player skill to do effectively. A good combat prober was a welcome addition to any fleet. Then CCP brain seized and decided to remove player skill from probing making probing a new player entry profession; ofc the natural consequence of this is that every nub can now combat probe, which in turn means that sniper fleets are less viable. Why not roll back some of the changes that were made to probing to increase its difficulty again? This would have the added benefit of making exploration more worthwhile since increased difficulty would help raise the prices for items dropped in exploration sites. And this can all happen without hurting some of the most dedicated ccp players, i.e. multiboxers, needlessly.
I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
|
Esmanpir
Raccoon's with LightSabers
40
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 19:17:56 -
[252] - Quote
I think this change will mostly benefit the hardcore PVPrs and opportunists in low and null by providing them with more targets from the less experienced fleets and FCs. It will make it somewhat more difficult for new players / fleets / FCs, and rewards those fleets and players who have elevated PVP to a craft. Although I understand the goal of CCP in making these changes, I'm not convinced they're considering the full impact of these changes. As with all things CCP does, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Another +1 for CCP kowtowing to a specific group of vocal players and ignoring the effect it has on the entire spectrum of play.
|
Esmanpir
Raccoon's with LightSabers
40
|
Posted - 2015.08.07 19:29:05 -
[253] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Cuddly Cutie wrote:I'm a Miner, an there are Point im not happy with, "You can not Fleetwarp to Bookmarks" so my Lovely Miner fleet rest in peace, in future it is not possible to warp to savespots, or to a POS, you can just set a warp-to, and make each account a 10 klick follow to warp challange, what is meaning R.I.P Acc2 - Acc3 - Acc4 ... .
I hope CCP is sometimes thinking about EvE-Online and not only about PvP.
Please keap in mind, EvE is more than destroying things, and looking for good fights. Had you not realized, the whole idea behind fleet warp changes is to make solo mining and PVE gangs easier to catch? Either that or CCP didn't really think about the consequences of this change when combined with, The Power of Two "never fly alone" promotions. These promotions should now be removed from Account Management. It will soon be false advertising with yet another nerf to multiboxing. The coming change does nothing more than make sniper fleets even harder to deal with, unless all you fly is sniper fleets. CCP again missed the boat by going too far with change, where minor tweaks would have worked far better, they went for a full nerf. NB; I believe the goal is to see how few single account subscribers CCP can survive with. That can't be good for a game that has for its entire life promoted and encouraged multiboxing.
CCP won't consider anything other than PVP for two reasons: 1) Any of them that actually play the game, mostly only PVP. 2) The majority of outspoken critics for change are PVPrs. Look through the threads... Pirates, gankers, PVPrs... Anyone who posts an idea or thread about improving the mining, multiboxing, or single player high-sec experience gets lambasted by a small, vocal group of PVPrs and gankers.
Heaven forbid CCP actually asked for input on how to improve the player experience for the part-time and / or predominantly non-PVP player. That idea is usually met with, "Eve is a PVP game." I think that's mostly true, but doesn't need to be. Certainly is becoming more so. |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
891
|
Posted - 2015.08.10 06:49:19 -
[254] - Quote
Aeon Veritas wrote:Especially for threads like this the forum needs "next DEV post" / "previous DEV post" buttons. The "first DEV post" is just plain useless here... If you click on the DEV tag on one of their posts, it takes you to the next dev post in that thread (unless that is the last one). |
Azarath NazGhoul
The Scope Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.14 16:46:08 -
[255] - Quote
I still really wish CCP would actually tell us what they think this magical GÇ£player involvementGÇ¥ is. It actually seems like they have designers design for a different game. Please explain how a player will get more involved in this change, do you seriously believe that the FC will start saying GÇ£all lets meet 400 of the gate, thatGÇÖs where the enemy are, see you there!GÇ¥ The only change once again will be slowing down fights, i.e. create more waiting for the fleet member and more stress for the FC.
Stop GÇ£sellingGÇ¥ changes with fancy words like GÇ£player involvementGÇ¥ and explain how you think it will work and we can tell you the truth.
|
Resa Moon
New Eden Miners Association
10
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 11:09:38 -
[256] - Quote
Want to add my voice to those who've spoken against this change to fleet warp.
Very detrimental to multi-box mining for the reasons others have outlined.
Very detrimental to small gang warfare. We spend quality time and effort preparing tactical and safe-spot bookmarks for the systems we live in or frequent and use those bookmarks when we fight hostiles. What engages our gang members isn't the act of warping, it's the fight that takes place when we get there. Taking away fleet warping to bookmarks by those in command positions really takes away some of the tactical benefit we have of knowing and preparing our terrain.
New Eden Mining Blog
|
Maekchu
EVE University Ivy League
102
|
Posted - 2015.08.16 15:35:50 -
[257] - Quote
Wow... The amount of butthurt from multiboxing miners in this thread O.o
So you finally face a small chance of losing some of your ships and can't mine in complete safety?
With CCP delaying the implementation, I really hope they are not caving to the amount of whine in this thread.
Explosions need to happen for the economy to go around. If you can mine in complete safety and warp whenever something appears in local, then that is a flawed mechanic. |
Wun NgoWen
Unforeseen Consequences. Triumvirate.
24
|
Posted - 2015.08.18 11:31:22 -
[258] - Quote
In my alliance, we routinely warp to someone thats Xes up at a distance or not, fleet warps are rare so no biggie as far as we're concerned.
But I'm curious what else is there in next week's release?
|
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
972
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 14:54:46 -
[259] - Quote
Going to have to wait for a covert ops to scan down and warp to a fleet...
That much harder to get a fight.
Not today spaghetti.
|
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
972
|
Posted - 2015.08.25 15:00:39 -
[260] - Quote
Also I'm pretty sure long range T3 battlecruisers were used last night to smash a Machariel fleet so there's that.
All in all this change is dumb.
Not today spaghetti.
|
|
kraken11 jensen
The Gallant Collective Requiem Eternal
95
|
Posted - 2015.08.26 04:02:22 -
[261] - Quote
Maekchu wrote:Wow... The amount of butthurt from multiboxing miners in this thread O.o
So you finally face a small chance of losing some of your ships and can't mine in complete safety?
With CCP delaying the implementation, I really hope they are not caving to the amount of whine in this thread.
Explosions need to happen for the economy to go around. If you can mine in complete safety and warp whenever something appears in local, then that is a flawed mechanic.
Multiboxing or not, i think it would be retardely annoying removing it in the way it's today. |
Nanar DeNanardon
Babylon Knights DARKNESS.
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 07:56:05 -
[262] - Quote
Maekchu wrote:Wow... The amount of butthurt from multiboxing miners in this thread O.o
So you finally face a small chance of losing some of your ships and can't mine in complete safety?
With CCP delaying the implementation, I really hope they are not caving to the amount of whine in this thread.
Explosions need to happen for the economy to go around. If you can mine in complete safety and warp whenever something appears in local, then that is a flawed mechanic.
Mining is boring and you win far less money than rating in NULL SEC.
This change will make mining just a bit more dangerous and very less profitable: - no fleet warp to BM means more time to reach the asteroids (especially at the end of the belt) - it will still be possible to instant warp the full fleet to the rorqual in POS when hostile appear in local
Finally I'm pretty sure this change will make less target for you the hunters, but the few rabbit in belt will still be safe...
More mouse click, less money, I'll rather stop some accounts and back to high sec. |
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
94
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 03:03:47 -
[263] - Quote
I agree, Mining is an utterly boring occupation in EVE, Hours of grinding roids for little return, target for anyone with the stones to go hunting them and butt of eons of jokes from all.....That is all except those that engage in it as a profession in EVE.
The assumption I see being expressed here in this and many others threads is that Miners are in some way wrong for what they do, that simply by not engaging in PvP they should not be allowed to play EVE, result no matter what they do to improve there lot everyone and his dog rides over the hill waving flames regarding them, yet in doing so they provide little or no back up for there accusations and inferences, simply troll for trolling sake mostly.
CCP on the other hand have little regard for this niche in EVE, ...Butt hurt, interesting term but in reality far from the facts,
Truth is that CCP approached the problem of ISBOXER in my view from the wrong angle, instead of banning it they should have encompassed it as an add-on to EVE, licensed the software and if that proved impossible, write there own version, in this manner they could have complete control over how it was used, were and when and on what ships, for this CCP could rightly charge a fee.
Oddly they could also done this with things like EVEMON and similar utilities whats surprising is why they have not done it.
Whatever happens regarding multi boxing over all, banning ISBOXER outright like they did has had ramification to EVE far beyond that expected I suspect and has not benefited EVE in anyway.
Own nothing, Build nothing, Plan nothing, Just blow it all up, you know it makes perfect sense, Fozzie says so.
|
Darkblad
Hilf Dir selbst in EVE
2301
|
Posted - 2015.09.24 05:31:17 -
[264] - Quote
Aeon Veritas wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Reserved for future Q&A =) I think this post needs to be updated Most definately, considering that this change no longer appears on http://updates.eveonline.com/coming/ I checked up to http://updates.eveonline.com/coming/fall/
EVE Infolinks GÇó Mining Guide GÇó Missions
(EN & DE)
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |