Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Tyranis Marcus
Bloody Heathens
1449
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 04:39:12 -
[61] - Quote
Looks like there's a lot of real cool stuff coming.
I'm not too crazy about the idea of my ships rusting while in the hangar, though. Shouldn't they be made of something more durable than that? And aren't the hangars climate controlled? Wait, of course they are. They're on a space station! They have to be.
Do not run. We are your friends.
|
Beta Maoye
80
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 06:35:41 -
[62] - Quote
The road map looks good. CCP has spent too much time attempting to tame a small percentage of very vocal players. A very large portion of quiet players are looking forward getting their hands on these wonderful features. Please move forward. |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3995
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 06:54:50 -
[63] - Quote
Beta Maoye wrote:The road map looks good. CCP has spent too much time attempting to tame a small percentage of very vocal players. A very large portion of quiet players are looking forward getting their hands on these wonderful features. Please move forward.
And a even larger and even quieter portion of players is getting nothing to thrill about. The big kahoona of the plan are Citadels, which are multiplayer PvP structures and so are 99% useless to solo PvErs, who amount to 50% of all subscribers.
Even when they are shoven down the throat of POS owners, their usage among that large silent protion will be no better than POS themselves.
CCP haves a real funny way to implement "customer oriented design", probably out of less than kosher awareness on who are their customers and why do they give them money.
(Shall we remember that CCP first made EP CCP Seagull, then developed the Rubicon plan, then started getting better hard data on customer behavior... so the Rubicon plan likely was built on the data availabe during its inception, which maybe underestimated the amount of customers who don't buy EVE's multiplayer PvP. At least, this is what I speculate on why so many players are getting so little attention in the current development cycle)
CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now".
62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?"
CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
17090
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 07:26:45 -
[64] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Beta Maoye wrote:The road map looks good. CCP has spent too much time attempting to tame a small percentage of very vocal players. A very large portion of quiet players are looking forward getting their hands on these wonderful features. Please move forward. And a even larger and even quieter portion of players is getting nothing to thrill about. The big kahoona of the plan are Citadels, which are multiplayer PvP structures and so are 99% useless to solo PvErs, who amount to 50% of all subscribers. Even when they are shoven down the throat of POS owners, their usage among that large silent protion will be no better than POS themselves. CCP haves a real funny way to implement "customer oriented design", probably out of less than kosher awareness on who are their customers and why do they give them money. (Shall we remember that CCP first made EP CCP Seagull, then developed the Rubicon plan, then started getting better hard data on customer behavior... so the Rubicon plan likely was built on the data availabe during its inception, which maybe underestimated the amount of customers who don't buy EVE's multiplayer PvP. At least, this is what I speculate on why so many players are getting so little attention in the current development cycle)
Well never mind, you've always got the option of jumping over to Star Citizen!
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike Circle-Of-Two
51
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 09:59:05 -
[65] - Quote
The decision to "bundle" capital-changes and citadels to one of the "new" major releases is a good move CCP Seagul. Please make sure to put a LOT of effort into test and verification, so you don't get back to the "EVE is broken for several weeks"-status when rolling out major releases though!
Will be very interesting to see what you have planned for capitals, specially supers and titans!
Also, many new nice features and functions coming up. We have a doctrin called "Rusty Nails" - now they actually CAN be rusty!
Talking about that, about seeing stuff. I know sometime ago at a fanfest or other media, there was a mention from CCP about "picture-in-picture" functionality, so you actually had the possibilty to see what you are shooting at - as it is now, EVE still is a max-zoomed-out-game in pvp, where you often go for overview instead of details. The only thing you ever see are purple and red symbols over the tactical overlay. Has that idea of pic-in-pic been scrapped, or was I dreaming? Guess it would have to be on a separate screen though, there are to many chat-boxes, local, overview, scanner, probing, fleet-window and other stuff in pvp, so you hardly even see the tactical overview anyway, and there is no room for another window..and that brings up another question - any news on updates to the UI in general? It is very old by now...
CEO Svea Rike
|
Ice Cold Beer
To The Stars
4
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 11:46:03 -
[66] - Quote
I see nothing in here to excite the empire care bear brigade but this has been the situation for the last 2 years or more.
I see nothing that will stop the continual decline in the player base and nothing to entice new players to join the game nor persuade old faces to come back to the game.
My main accounts were part of a small but very successful empire based corp with ties to low sec for capital builds using POS to manage our research and manufacture. There may have been around 30 accounts linked to this corp so far as I can tell this account is the only active one left and that's due to expire before Xmas.
We hear that more devs are leaving this must be a sign that income continues to drop. The proliferation of blingwear in skins and stuff is a sign that CCP are looking to generate more income from the sale of such tat that mean developers are being taken of game development.
The game has become a hot bed of cyber bullies geared towards those that value a narcissistic in game persona. I suspect that 99% of the ISK is in the hands of maybe 20 people in game and as for the CSM, well the CSM have their own agenda rather than the greater good of the game.
All in all the game is in terminal decline but has done well to last so long. Its only a matter of time before those who own CCP will be looking for an exit strategy, the sad news is that many have already found their exit strategy and quit.
|
Frank Pannon
174
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 12:04:26 -
[67] - Quote
Ice Cold Beer wrote:I see nothing in here to excite the empire care bear brigade but this has been the situation for the last 2 years or more.
I see nothing that will stop the continual decline in the player base and nothing to entice new players to join the game nor persuade old faces to come back to the game.
My main accounts were part of a small but very successful empire based corp with ties to low sec for capital builds using POS to manage our research and manufacture. There may have been around 30 accounts linked to this corp so far as I can tell this account is the only active one left and that's due to expire before Xmas.
We hear that more devs are leaving this must be a sign that income continues to drop. The proliferation of blingwear in skins and stuff is a sign that CCP are looking to generate more income from the sale of such tat that mean developers are being taken of game development.
The game has become a hot bed of cyber bullies geared towards those that value a narcissistic in game persona. I suspect that 99% of the ISK is in the hands of maybe 20 people in game and as for the CSM, well the CSM have their own agenda rather than the greater good of the game.
All in all the game is in terminal decline but has done well to last so long. Its only a matter of time before those who own CCP will be looking for an exit strategy, the sad news is that many have already found their exit strategy and quit.
OK, so you do not like / have no time for / can not adapt to the game anymore. You wish you did, hence the bitterness. Maybe it is time for you to move on, silently.
I recently came back to the game and am having a blast in nullsec. Mostly due to the people I fly with, and despite some of the mechanics I dislike.
Can I have your stuff?
|
Ice Cold Beer
To The Stars
4
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 12:48:52 -
[68] - Quote
Frank
You really come across as a jerk.
The facts are simple. Dev's being fired to cut costs, player base is down reducing income, plex sales down reducing income, vanity items increasing to try and increase income.
Your assumptions around a failure to adapt are just dumb assumptions and have no basis in fact. Lets be honest you made them up as a vain attempt at a troll post.
I am glad you are back having a blast. You are just what the game needs, maybe you should run for CSM?
As for having my stuff, that's a new one, I think you may be starting a trend in asking for folks stuff. I wonder if will catch on.
|
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3995
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 13:02:12 -
[69] - Quote
Ice Cold Beer wrote:I see nothing in here to excite the empire care bear brigade but this has been the situation for the last 2 years or more. (...)
The average tenure of the highsec carebear are 2 years. 2013 had a healthy PCU, and now in 2015 PCU is down by 30% from 2013's.
Meanwhile CCP's best efforts to retain highsec carebears focus around convincing them to stop being what they pay for, rather than take them at face value and give them either what they want (but CCP doesn't) or something CCP wants and the carebears would want too.
CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now".
62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?"
CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
3052
|
Posted - 2015.10.05 18:09:32 -
[70] - Quote
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Ice Cold Beer wrote:I see nothing in here to excite the empire care bear brigade but this has been the situation for the last 2 years or more. (...)
The average tenure of the highsec carebear are 2 years. 2013 had a healthy PCU, and now in 2015 PCU is down by 30% from 2013's. Meanwhile CCP's best efforts to retain highsec carebears focus on convincing them to stop being what they pay for, rather than take them at face value and give them either what they want (but CCP doesn't) or something CCP wants and the carebears would want too.
Sugar wrote a thing related to this
http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2015/10/taboo-questions.html
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
|
Sturmwolke
653
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 04:28:33 -
[71] - Quote
Ok, nothing earth-shatterring till spring then. |
Krughor Khan
State Protectorate Caldari State
4
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 04:31:40 -
[72] - Quote
Sansha, blood raider and drifters. Will eve have three types of incs? Should I train for a BS or logi too? |
Indahmawar Fazmarai
3998
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 06:44:22 -
[73] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:Ice Cold Beer wrote:I see nothing in here to excite the empire care bear brigade but this has been the situation for the last 2 years or more. (...)
The average tenure of the highsec carebear are 2 years. 2013 had a healthy PCU, and now in 2015 PCU is down by 30% from 2013's. Meanwhile CCP's best efforts to retain highsec carebears focus on convincing them to stop being what they pay for, rather than take them at face value and give them either what they want (but CCP doesn't) or something CCP wants and the carebears would want too. Sugar wrote a thing related to this http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2015/10/taboo-questions.html m
The answer has been massive... I'll try and drop a few comments too.
CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now".
62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?"
CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
|
Vollhov
Senators of Eridan Red Alliance
296
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 09:34:41 -
[74] - Quote
Bring back the Eve 2013
Thanks you -í-íP Falcon"that helped to quit EVE"
Jamyl the Great
CCP can never come up with such a character as Jamyl Sarum.
No love of the the project and imagination.
"All these wayward children." (c) Jamyl Sarum I
|
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
25
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 12:08:10 -
[75] - Quote
Centar Tivianne wrote:It all looks good I just wish I could play the damn game, so you can make a ship go rusty but you canGÇÖt give the likes of me who are colour blind a way of setting colours so I (we) can see an attacker arrive on grid.
All I (we) ask is either a colour slider to set an adjustable GÇÿredGÇÖ so we can see it, or a set of colour GÇÿthemesGÇÖ so we can pick a scheme to suite our degree of colour deficiency. We already have this for the windows so why not for the icons/brackets?
Being pretty red green colour blind myself(to the point where I cannot be a pilot), I can't help to wonder if you are not exaggerating a little? Sure it would be nice and i would be all for it, but can't play the game??.... When on my FW alt(with my minimal PVP overview) I just look at the Type bracket in the overview. If it says Thorax for example and is not blue/purple, I go for it. |
Shaera Taam
Khanid Prime Free Irregulars
175
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 14:01:40 -
[76] - Quote
Holeeshneikes.... Thats...thats... A lot.
/continues reading
( thus space reserved for further rants and / or exclamations of joy )
Thus Spake the Frigate Goddess!
|
Jita info
Fallen Angels corp
2
|
Posted - 2015.10.06 20:46:16 -
[77] - Quote
what are pepoles thoughts on adding smuggling as a profession in eve mainly as npc content? |
Frank Pannon
174
|
Posted - 2015.10.07 10:28:00 -
[78] - Quote
Ice Cold Beer wrote:Frank
You really come across as a jerk.
The facts are simple. Dev's being fired to cut costs, player base is down reducing income, plex sales down reducing income, vanity items increasing to try and increase income.
Your assumptions around a failure to adapt are just dumb assumptions and have no basis in fact. Lets be honest you made them up as a vain attempt at a troll post.
I am glad you are back having a blast. You are just what the game needs, maybe you should run for CSM?
As for having my stuff, that's a new one, I think you may be starting a trend in asking for folks stuff. I wonder if will catch on.
Nah, being a jerk was the least of my intentions. I apologize for that. I will never run for CSM, am just a dude who plays a game.
Is just really frustrating to see all the doom and gloom people hanging around spreading their ideas, pulling statistics out of their a**e, and trying to persuade others to stop playing, since there is nothing fun to be had in this game anymore, all is broken, devs do not care, engine is old, etc etc etc.
I used to play World of Tanks. Lately it does not provide me with satisfaction, so i silently left the game. One day I might go back to it. I never visited the forums to cry and moan about it. I think people who post here are really passionate about this game, and I wish they would use this passion to something positive, instead of ... well the doom and gloom stuff. |
Cearain
Goose Swarm Coalition
1387
|
Posted - 2015.10.07 20:46:43 -
[79] - Quote
Kynric wrote:I really like the idea of falloff for neuts, transfers and reps. Can we have falloff for webs too?
I do not understand why they do this for neuts. If your neut misses I guess you will still drain your own cap but not drain the opponents cap? I guess I don't see what problem this is attempting to solve.
Are they going to do this for noses as well?
Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
|
Alexis Nightwish
333
|
Posted - 2015.10.07 23:21:48 -
[80] - Quote
Skimmed through it and for me BiaB (forces links on-grid) and falloff for remote assistance (I've wanted this since Logistics were added to EVE) are the only two I'm excited about. These are really going to change the game, and for the better!
That D-scan cone... I dunno. On the one hand it will make my life a lot easier, but being able to dscan a target to get your probes close enough for a single scan hit is what separated the good probers from the great. I certainly am not in the 'great' category but after that's added everyone will be.
The new destroyers just look like another way to blueball/prevent explosions with their AoE get out of jail free card. Hopefully I'm wrong and CCP will do something like making is so the AoE MJD module is shut down when the destroyer is warp scrammed.
CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge
EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Fixing bombs, not the bombers
|
|
Whisperen
Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels
46
|
Posted - 2015.10.10 15:34:45 -
[81] - Quote
So nothing interesting for 12 months this makes resubbing a easy decision. |
Styphon the Black
Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union
40
|
Posted - 2015.10.13 15:05:36 -
[82] - Quote
Most of the upcoming stuff sounds great. Like new Destroyers and Mining Frigate. I love new ships and items.
However, one thing that was on the list that is a terrible idea is the "Falloff For Neuts and Remote Assistance Modules". Ok, I could really care less about the neuts falloff. Yes neuts are strong but I do not believe they are broken. But I am not here to talk about neuts I want to talk about the remote assistance modules.
You do not need to add a falloff for to armor or shied repairers. First they already have incredibly short ranges. The T1 logistic frigates already have issue staying in range of fleet members do to varying orbits. Non-bonused ships have to be incredibly close to use remote repairers; like less than 6k for any medium sized haul. Further adding an additional falloff to these will make them very difficult/almost impossible to use.
The only defense logistics ships have against an enemy is to stay out of range. Bringing them closer into the fight isn't adding anything to the game. It will just mean that you will have less logi in fights. Also think about non-bonused ships when making these changes to modules. How can they be effectively used on non logi ships? If they problem is with them having too much range perhaps it is the individual ships that need to be changed and not the module. |
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2032
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 11:07:08 -
[83] - Quote
What is the tribute system?
Some crazy person told me that it's a daily reward for talking part in PVE ... that's not true, right?
If so i think that is silly and would make more sense if it was a daily reward for taking part in PVP.
Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
5662
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 11:34:59 -
[84] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:What is the tribute system? Some crazy person told me that it's a daily reward for talking part in PVE ... that's not true, right? If so i think that is silly and would make more sense if it was a daily reward for taking part in PVP.
It's a small bonus you get, for the first time you get a dungeon completion each day (actually a little more complicated, but this is the tldr version)
That's pretty much any PvE. Missions, combat sites, data sites, relic sites that kind of thing.
Woo! CSM X!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2032
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 12:27:04 -
[85] - Quote
So isk rewards for earning isk?
I guess it will encourage noobs to log on... but then again, so would regulated plex prices.
Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
|
Whitehound
2887
|
Posted - 2015.10.16 13:04:30 -
[86] - Quote
I already have to make a request...
...when you add falloffs to remote assistance modules, and I am assuming you will be keeping the current balance for these modules after the change, could you please also consider giving us additional faction and deadspace versions of the large remote assistance modules? The M-sized ones are available up to meta 13 (A-Type), but the L-sized ones are at best Tech2 and storyline (meta 5 & 7), and so the M-sized ones beat the larger modules quite easily in efficiency. Having more options for the L-sized modules would be really nice.
Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
|
HeXxploiT
Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn
187
|
Posted - 2015.10.19 18:18:16 -
[87] - Quote
EWAR Module Tiericide
Quote:GÇ£TiericideGÇ¥ comes to Neutralizers and Nosferatus, with some new variations as well. Changes to Warp Disruption Field Generators and ECCM also follow.
This is rather vague. First off neuts and Nos aren't even classified as Ewar but as engineering equipment. Secondly is this current run limited to ECCM under the EWAR category?
Perhaps a dev could expound on this just a little? |
Krystyn
Serenity Rising LLC 404 Alliance Not Found
215
|
Posted - 2015.10.20 03:23:53 -
[88] - Quote
Didn't see server shutdown date on the calendar. Which is certainly going to be coming up rather quickly with the insane Pay to Win idiocy. |
Jaantrag
33
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 18:48:44 -
[89] - Quote
did another pass from the updates page and saw some new stuff since i last looked it ages ago .. but still bugs me this post
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5923642#post5923642
|
Tornii
The Scope Gallente Federation
75
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 18:31:32 -
[90] - Quote
Where does assault frig rebalance (resurrection is probably what's needed) fit within all that's upcoming in Winter/Spring? I remember reading it was planned but haven't seen it on the updates page/devblogs.
Money is violence
Power corrupts
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |