Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 27 post(s) |
Metal Hunter
The Explorers Club
137
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 10:32:34 -
[721] - Quote
Perhaps this question was already asked, excuse if I repeat. Whether the new capitals will repair each other at the activated Triage module? Whether the new capital will operate drones at the activated Triage module? Whether the volume of capacitor of the new capital and consumption will be reconsidered by capacitor modules? Whether basic capacitor of the new capital will be increased? |
BambarbiyaKirgudu
RD work W-Space Citizen
17
|
Posted - 2015.11.11 14:32:33 -
[722] - Quote
Hello dear developers! I want to express opinion of the majority of Russian-speaking players! Reworking Capital Ships will lead 1) to a drop online, as many players learn the skills on them, which are studied over the years! You created a situation of uncertainty, play in further in EVE or not! 2) capital ships will not to be in demand, on them will not fly 3) -ü5, -ü6 will become extinct 4) we think that you go not the right way and that you must not redo the old, that you must add only new! |
Calexis Atredies
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
12
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 12:47:07 -
[723] - Quote
I am a little unhappy to hear that the capacitor warfare with capitals is due to become more difficult with the addition of capital cap boosters and capacitor batteries.
Please consider the implications when scaling capital capacitor modules against sub-capital energy neutralizers. You have several anti-capital sub-caps like Armageddons, Bhaalgorns and Legions. This combat dynamic will be lost considering the scaling of capacitor size and the fact all current cap boosters regardless of size have a 12 second activation time.
You could potentially be making the game very boring. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Get Off My Lawn
1925
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 15:08:34 -
[724] - Quote
Calexis Atredies wrote:I am a little unhappy to hear that the capacitor warfare with capitals is due to become more difficult with the addition of capital cap boosters and capacitor batteries.
Please consider the implications when scaling capital capacitor modules against sub-capital energy neutralizers. You have several anti-capital sub-caps like Armageddons, Bhaalgorns and Legions. This combat dynamic will be lost considering the scaling of capacitor size and the fact all current cap boosters regardless of size have a 12 second activation time.
You could potentially be making the game very boring.
They are also adding capital neutralizers.
CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
772
|
Posted - 2015.11.12 15:15:42 -
[725] - Quote
Calexis Atredies wrote:I am a little unhappy to hear that the capacitor warfare with capitals is due to become more difficult with the addition of capital cap boosters and capacitor batteries.
Please consider the implications when scaling capital capacitor modules against sub-capital energy neutralizers. You have several anti-capital sub-caps like Armageddons, Bhaalgorns and Legions. This combat dynamic will be lost considering the scaling of capacitor size and the fact all current cap boosters regardless of size have a 12 second activation time.
You could potentially be making the game very boring. Your Fax will save you from being capped out - At least for as long as it takes the blob your fighting to neut it out - because, no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob wins (won't have to be a capital bob either - sub caps are getting an open ticket to killing capitals).
Best bet - Join a capital mega group (they don't deploy unless it is a sure thing) OR sell your capitals and be done with them.
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Metal Hunter
The Explorers Club
138
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 06:07:13 -
[726] - Quote
Why so to worry? New modules for the capitals will be installed in empty seats. Also will put them instead of something that put earlier. Empty seats that weren't added. And EHP will cut. Cap boosters won't rescue the capitals. The capitals won't become better, thicker. Both killed them, and will kill further. That personally afflicts me. The capital and super capital ships turn into unnecessary garbage. Only because they will be easier to be caught and killed. Who will begin to fly, risk on them - understanding that risk and spent for these ships ISK aren't justified? |
Metal Hunter
The Explorers Club
138
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 07:30:11 -
[727] - Quote
Interestingly, and why didn't guess to enter Capital Ancillary Shield Booster and similar on armor... |
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
483
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 14:53:55 -
[728] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: ..... because, no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob wins (won't have to be a capital bob either - sub caps are getting an open ticket to killing capitals).
How the smeg does no refitting timer and remote reps prevent biggest blobs from winning?
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Emmy Mnemonic
Svea Rike Circle-Of-Two
52
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 16:33:20 -
[729] - Quote
Just a thought: * Dreadnaughts will be the only capital able to fit a Siege-module, which buffs DPS etc, while rendering remote assistance impossible for the duration of the Siege-cycle.
* Force Auxilliary Capitals wll be the only capital able to fit the Triage module, which gives bonus to reps, remote reps etc, while redering remote assistance to the triaged FAC impossible for the duration of the triage cycle.
* Carriers will be the only ship able to fit ??? which buffs ???, while rendering ??? impossible for the duration of ???
For consistency, and for players that do not want to invest in a third cap-ship; why not enable carriers to fit either a siege module (buffing damage and local reps) or a triage module (buffing remote reps/local reps), but make it not-as-good-as-the-other-capitals. This would give more flexibility to the poorer players that can not afford 3 capitals, aswell as bring a deeper dimension to cap warfare. Or you just merge the Triage and Siege modules into one unified module for all three capitals - The Triege Module or perhaps the Siage Module...you get my point....
CEO Svea Rike
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
773
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 20:17:06 -
[730] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: ..... because, no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob wins (won't have to be a capital bob either - sub caps are getting an open ticket to killing capitals).
How the smeg does no refitting timer and remote reps prevent biggest blobs from winning? Go back to school, do some math and learn what + - & = signs mean, PLEASE. Then try reading what the quote says.
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
483
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 22:08:14 -
[731] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: ..... because, no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob wins (won't have to be a capital bob either - sub caps are getting an open ticket to killing capitals).
How the smeg does no refitting timer and remote reps prevent biggest blobs from winning? Go back to school, do some math and learn what + - & = signs mean, PLEASE. Then try reading what the quote says. So your saying you have no ******* idea what your talking about? Because you really don't.
AKA the scientist.
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2714
|
Posted - 2015.11.13 23:59:28 -
[732] - Quote
Here's my idea for how trading carriers with force auxiliaries should work:
When rolling out the change, begin allowing players to freely exchange docked carriers for force auxiliary, they simply click a button and a countdown begins. One hour later the carrier is now a force auxiliary of the same race. They can halt the process and undock it as a carrier if they need it all of a sudden.
Give a three-month grace period for free changes. Within this period, people can swap to a force auxiliary, fly it around and play with it, then swap it back to a carrier, fly it around, and even swap it back to a force auxiliary.
After the grace period ends, you can still swap them as long as you stay docked but once you undock the ship, its type is set for keeps. Also, any carriers or force auxiliaries that went into production after the change rolled out (even during the grace period) are set and unable to change type.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
773
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 01:47:06 -
[733] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote: ..... because, no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob wins (won't have to be a capital bob either - sub caps are getting an open ticket to killing capitals).
How the smeg does no refitting timer and remote reps prevent biggest blobs from winning? Go back to school, do some math and learn what + - & = signs mean, PLEASE. Then try reading what the quote says. So your saying you have no ******* idea what your talking about? Because you really don't. How does what I wrote (in plain English) to you, add up to me saying it prevents blobs winning? Like I said, read what I wrote then respond to what is written.. Not what you think it says.
Hint the + & = signs create the outcome (no remote reps + refitting timers = biggest blob WINS) The = sign is the outcome.. BIGGEST BLOB WINS.
How do you get I am saying it prevents the biggest blobs winning? When in fact I said the exact opposite.
Learn to read English and stop being a bad.
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2715
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 02:21:43 -
[734] - Quote
The biggest blobs usually win no matter what, but there is a significant variance depending on actual flying skill. Problem is, most of the big blobs are the ones with more skill. You might say TEST is an exception to that, and you'd be quite wrong.
Reducing the skill barrier will give smaller groups a larger chance to compete, while also making it easier for a larger yet less-skilled blob to fend off a small group that is highly skilled. I do feel that skill should be important in EVE but it is going to be important no matter how the game changes and more importantly it comes from experience flying as a lower-skilled pilot. It is for that reason that I support changes that lower the barrier to entry for newer pilots.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sayod Physulem
EVE University Ivy League
42
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 10:35:16 -
[735] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:The biggest blobs usually win no matter what, but there is a significant variance depending on actual flying skill. Problem is, most of the big blobs are the ones with more skill. You might say TEST is an exception to that, and you'd be quite wrong.
Reducing the skill barrier will give smaller groups a larger chance to compete, while also making it easier for a larger yet less-skilled blob to fend off a small group that is highly skilled. I do feel that skill should be important in EVE but it is going to be important no matter how the game changes and more importantly it comes from experience flying as a lower-skilled pilot. It is for that reason that I support changes that lower the barrier to entry for newer pilots.
That doesn't make any sense. While I agree, that larger groups are often more skilled aswell, this still is the wrong conclusion. Lets work through the cases (it is always blob versus small group): (1) Fighting is skill intensive: blob has skill and small group has skill -> blob wins blob has skill and small group has no skill -> blob wins hard blob has no skill and small group has skill > small group wins blob has no skill and small group has no skill -> blob wins (2) Fighting is not skill intensive: since skill doesn't matter we can just assume case 1.4 (both have no skill) -> outcome is always blob wins
Sigh simple truth tables guys... even if the case 1.2 is most likely - case (1) is still better than case (2) at least in my opinion, because then the small group has a chance - even if it may be small |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2717
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 10:44:58 -
[736] - Quote
Sayod Physulem wrote:Sigh simple truth tables guys... even if the case 1.2 is most likely - case (1) is still better than case (2) at least in my opinion, because then the small group has a chance - even if it may be small You're looking at it in terms of even amounts of engagements between the forces. Small groups with skill will take advantage of their small profile and sneak around to avoid detection. They will fly slippery ships and choose their fights. Big groups get impatient (because they're sluggish) and so the FC may rush into a fight to avoid having everyone go offline with no killmails.
There's a lot more to it than that, but you have to be careful when assuming anything is the same on both sides here. It's a lot more complicated than that.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sayod Physulem
EVE University Ivy League
42
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 10:55:16 -
[737] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Sayod Physulem wrote:Sigh simple truth tables guys... even if the case 1.2 is most likely - case (1) is still better than case (2) at least in my opinion, because then the small group has a chance - even if it may be small You're looking at it in terms of even amounts of engagements between the forces. Small groups with skill will take advantage of their small profile and sneak around to avoid detection. They will fly slippery ships and choose their fights. Big groups get impatient (because they're sluggish) and so the FC may rush into a fight to avoid having everyone go offline with no killmails. There's a lot more to it than that, but you have to be careful when assuming anything is the same on both sides here. It's a lot more complicated than that.
yes and no - in general it works that way - "they will fly slippery ships" you assume an intelligent/skilled small group. "Big groups get impatient" you assume that they act stupid/without skill. So you basically created a sub case of 1.3 where the small group has the advantage. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6859
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 16:36:21 -
[738] - Quote
Sayod Physulem wrote:Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Sayod Physulem wrote:Sigh simple truth tables guys... even if the case 1.2 is most likely - case (1) is still better than case (2) at least in my opinion, because then the small group has a chance - even if it may be small You're looking at it in terms of even amounts of engagements between the forces. Small groups with skill will take advantage of their small profile and sneak around to avoid detection. They will fly slippery ships and choose their fights. Big groups get impatient (because they're sluggish) and so the FC may rush into a fight to avoid having everyone go offline with no killmails. There's a lot more to it than that, but you have to be careful when assuming anything is the same on both sides here. It's a lot more complicated than that. yes and no - in general it works that way - "they will fly slippery ships" you assume an intelligent/skilled small group. "Big groups get impatient" you assume that they act stupid/without skill. So you basically created a sub case of 1.3 where the small group has the advantage. Maybe test has been feeling impatient lately.
I heard they were fighting with a bunch of fellows somewhere
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2717
|
Posted - 2015.11.14 19:06:07 -
[739] - Quote
Sayod Physulem wrote:"Big groups get impatient" you assume that they act stupid/without skill. So you basically created a sub case of 1.3 where the small group has the advantage. That's not what I said at all. I was explaining that a skilled group that is large may often act in ways that a skilled group that is small will not, and there are ways for a small group to take advantage of that, even if taking advantage of it rarely involves going toe-to-toe with the large group. There are many ways this plays out, I simply mentioned one.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
MrQuisno
Steelmaze
6
|
Posted - 2015.11.15 21:51:08 -
[740] - Quote
Hello,
I would like to join the focus group for capital ships. As over the last few years I been pushing many ideas on the forums for how it would be awesome to change up some of the capitals and fighters. I have push ideas like fittings to fighters or even different type of classes. Glad to see some of the ideas got used. Nerfing the capital ships HP to make them the players pick a path to all dps or tank.
I still think we are still missing a capital ship here. Why can't we get a super class for force Auxiliary with special abilities. You would use these type of ships which give special abilities out side the scope of command ships. Giving you extra fitting slot high med or low maybe even rigs. Instead of stacking penalties of using more then one type of module. In other words say you wanted to fit 4 cargo slots in the low. With this ship you would get same bounes for 4 fitted but would be able to free up one extra slot to fit what ever you liked. |
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2719
|
Posted - 2015.11.15 21:59:28 -
[741] - Quote
MrQuisno wrote:I still think we are still missing a capital ship here. Why can't we get a super class for force Auxiliary with special abilities. You would use these type of ships which give special abilities out side the scope of command ships. Giving you extra fitting slot high med or low maybe even rigs. Instead of stacking penalties of using more then one type of module. In other words say you wanted to fit 4 cargo slots in the low. With this ship you would get same bounes for 4 fitted but would be able to free up one extra slot to fit what ever you liked.
I'd rather see all capital ships competent to act as a command ship. Currently carriers, supercarriers, titans, Rorquals, and the Orca mini-capital all have command bonuses. I would like to see these added to dreadnoughts, and I hope force auxiliaries also get them.
edit: misread your comment.
Howabout force auxiliaries get high slot modules for electronic logistics, and they simply make a fitting choice whether to fit triage logistics or electronics logistics modules?
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Captain Awkward
Republic University Minmatar Republic
89
|
Posted - 2015.11.16 11:09:22 -
[742] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:MrQuisno wrote:I still think we are still missing a capital ship here. Why can't we get a super class for force Auxiliary with special abilities. You would use these type of ships which give special abilities out side the scope of command ships. Giving you extra fitting slot high med or low maybe even rigs. Instead of stacking penalties of using more then one type of module. In other words say you wanted to fit 4 cargo slots in the low. With this ship you would get same bounes for 4 fitted but would be able to free up one extra slot to fit what ever you liked. I'd rather see all capital ships competent to act as a command ship. Currently carriers, supercarriers, titans, Rorquals, and the Orca mini-capital all have command bonuses. I would like to see these added to dreadnoughts, and I hope force auxiliaries also get them.edit: misread your comment.
Howabout force auxiliaries get high slot modules for electronic logistics, and they simply make a fitting choice whether to fit triage logistics or electronics logistics modules?
Dont we have midslots for that ?
I like to see then having bonuses to their racial ewar counter though. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
313
|
Posted - 2015.11.19 18:00:25 -
[743] - Quote
I haven't seen this asked yet...
Will Dreadnaughts receive updated hull designs, from the art department, to show a docking bay (for their new Ship Maintenance Bay)?
CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
|
Bonzair
The Mirage Estamos Solos Alliance.
32
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:09:31 -
[744] - Quote
I have nothing to say. Just killing most important segment of the game. It won't be good as it hasn't been with sov, jumps, unstoppable nerf of ishtars etc. etc. Your statistic lies. I see 25 thousands ppl online instead 40 and even 30. You're going down. My congrats. Your creative team isn't professional it's team of random men from the street. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2731
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 18:17:59 -
[745] - Quote
Bonzair wrote:I see 25 thousands ppl online instead 40 and even 30. You're going down. It's an old game, and it's past its popularity peak. It's going to dwindle from here on out no matter what, but people certainly aren't leaving in droves. The fact of the matter is that most gamers have heard of EVE by now. People are coming in slower than they are leaving. It doesn't mean EVE is dying, in fact given how well it's staying afloat compared to every other game on the market, I think it's fair to say that CCP manages the single most successful MMO in gaming history. They're clearly doing something right.
You are angry that these changes make it more difficult for you to stay on top. You've grown used to game features that you learned to use a long time ago, and that gives you an advantage against newer and less experienced players. But with all these changes, their fresh minds tackle the learning process much more readily, while you find it difficult learning new tricks and abandoning old habits. It is annoying and it results in you seeing much newer and less-experienced pilots sometimes outperforming you. It doesn't mean the changes are bad, it only means they are recent relative to your experience.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
777
|
Posted - 2015.11.20 21:34:16 -
[746] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Bonzair wrote:I see 25 thousands ppl online instead 40 and even 30. You're going down. It's an old game, and it's past its popularity peak. It's going to dwindle from here on out no matter what, but people certainly aren't leaving in droves. The fact of the matter is that most gamers have heard of EVE by now. People are coming in slower than they are leaving. It doesn't mean EVE is dying, in fact given how well it's staying afloat compared to every other game on the market, I think it's fair to say that CCP manages the single most successful MMO in gaming history. They're clearly doing something right. You are angry that these changes make it more difficult for you to stay on top. You've grown used to game features that you learned to use a long time ago, and that gives you an advantage against newer and less experienced players. But with all these changes, their fresh minds tackle the learning process much more readily, while you find it difficult learning new tricks and abandoning old habits. It is annoying and it results in you seeing much newer and less-experienced pilots sometimes outperforming you. It doesn't mean the changes are bad, it only means they are recent relative to your experience. Actually you know - Your so very wrong. I have no idea how you could think newer less experienced players will have an advantage, over a group that can field hundreds of supers and titans (but only against a target they know can't contest them)
These changes favour large groups, which is why they are bad. Basically nothing changes - Devs waste months redesigning capitals, only to find the outcome is not going to create new content. The large groups still won't fight each other (no-one wants to risk a fight they can't guarantee winning) so nothing changes - Except, the investment in skills and isk.
Punitive and limited movement mechanics, Disposable capital ships, combined with large dominating groups = limited content. Doesn't matter how many new effects and affects you add or take away - The meta on TQ is N+1 and until that is changed (by players, CCP can't do it), Eve will continue to be a game of limited content, scope and opportunity.
I find it strange, CCP recruit employees from within the game - Many of the people responsible for design of the game have actually played the game - But clearly have no idea how the game is played
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2731
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 00:11:04 -
[747] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:I have no idea how you could think newer less experienced players will have an advantage, over a group that can field hundreds of supers and titans (but only against a target they know can't contest them) I said sometimes. I did say it is the older players who have the advantage. Some of them (particularly those with weaker networks and who are used to relying on their own strength, soloists and such) are put off by the changes because it diminishes their advantage and they feel they deserve to keep that advantage in full strength.
Sgt Ocker wrote:These changes favour large groups, which is why they are bad. Basically nothing changes - Devs waste months redesigning capitals, only to find the outcome is not going to create new content. The large groups still won't fight each other (no-one wants to risk a fight they can't guarantee winning) so nothing changes - Except, the investment in skills and isk. These changes have overwhelmingly favored small groups. Nullsec stagnation was smashed in a brilliant success back in Crucible and Inferno, and the game has drastically improved since. Large groups still have a strong advantage, but the bar for entry--both in size and in experience--has been lowered dramatically. CCP knows what they are doing, and they know they have pretty much run out of people who don't know about EVE yet, so they are marketing it to people who left once before while also preparing the game to maintain good balance for years to come.
There will always be hordes of players who can't see the forest for the trees, and it is imperative that CCP know not to give their input too much credit. Blizzard made that mistake and destroyed the most-played MMO on the market.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
777
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 01:14:25 -
[748] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:I have no idea how you could think newer less experienced players will have an advantage, over a group that can field hundreds of supers and titans (but only against a target they know can't contest them) I said sometimes. I did say it is the older players who have the advantage. Some of them (particularly those with weaker networks and who are used to relying on their own strength, soloists and such) are put off by the changes because it diminishes their advantage and they feel they deserve to keep that advantage in full strength. Sgt Ocker wrote:These changes favour large groups, which is why they are bad. Basically nothing changes - Devs waste months redesigning capitals, only to find the outcome is not going to create new content. The large groups still won't fight each other (no-one wants to risk a fight they can't guarantee winning) so nothing changes - Except, the investment in skills and isk. These changes have overwhelmingly favored small groups. Nullsec stagnation was smashed in a brilliant success back in Crucible and Inferno, and the game has drastically improved since. Large groups still have a strong advantage, but the bar for entry--both in size and in experience--has been lowered dramatically. CCP knows what they are doing, and they know they have pretty much run out of people who don't know about EVE yet, so they are marketing it to people who left once before while also preparing the game to maintain good balance for years to come. There will always be hordes of players who can't see the forest for the trees, and it is imperative that CCP know not to give their input too much credit. Blizzard made that mistake and destroyed the most-played MMO on the market. Ahh ok, so the large dominating groups who just blob with supers etc (knowing the group they are engaging has no chance of countering them) are not a problem - Capital warfare is balanced so every sized group has the same opportunities?
Nulsec stagnation - Nothing has changed - If you don't have an army of blues, you don't hold sov and or are nothing more than victims for the few dominating groups.
Jump range nerfs - Hurt smaller groups far more than large - Fatigue hurts smaller groups far more than large - Proposed capital changes again will hurt smaller groups while enhancing the abilities of the blobs.
Please show me what has really changed and how nulsec stagnation has been broken?A few alliances are no longer around and those who have replaced them, are all blue to each other. So we end up with a whole bunch of new groups holding sov - By being blue to as many around them as possible. Renters, some of whom are actually useful in a fight make up the bulk of changes to the sov map.
Not everyone wants to be part of a blob - If their plan is to get old players to return to the game, do you honestly think designing a meta that caused many of them to leave is gong to achieve that goal? Players quit eve for many reasons - Many quit because logging in for timers and strat ops just got boring - Returning to a blob meta by enabling the largest groups to continue to dominate - Is not going to encourage many to return.
The thing about not seeing the forest for the trees - Those who live and die in blobs, have one point of view, those who don't like blobs have another - So whoever CCP listen to, they are getting biased information - What works for the blobs like Test or Goons or PL, is certainly not good for smaller groups (unless they ally with the likes of Goons, PL or Test).
N+1 is not for the longevity Eve.
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2731
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 01:58:37 -
[749] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Nulsec stagnation - Nothing has changed - If you don't have an army of blues, you don't hold sov and or are nothing more than victims for the few dominating groups. that's what renting is all about
Sgt Ocker wrote:Jump range nerfs - Hurt smaller groups far more than large - Fatigue hurts smaller groups far more than large - Proposed capital changes again will hurt smaller groups while enhancing the abilities of the blobs. No. Jump fatigue has led to a huge increase in small gang prevalence due to the greatly diminished threat of hotdrops.
That animation starts at 2014 and captures a time period entire after the breaking of nullsec stagnation.
The problems are not all fixed perfectly, that is an extreme that will never be achieved. The problems are not nearly as bad as they were in the past, that is an extreme we left behind long ago.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
Sgt Ocker
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
777
|
Posted - 2015.11.21 07:24:22 -
[750] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Nulsec stagnation - Nothing has changed - If you don't have an army of blues, you don't hold sov and or are nothing more than victims for the few dominating groups. that's what renting is all about Sgt Ocker wrote:Jump range nerfs - Hurt smaller groups far more than large - Fatigue hurts smaller groups far more than large - Proposed capital changes again will hurt smaller groups while enhancing the abilities of the blobs. No. Jump fatigue has led to a huge increase in small gang prevalence due to the greatly diminished threat of hotdrops. That animation starts at 2014 and captures a time period entire after the breaking of nullsec stagnation. The problems are not all fixed perfectly, that is an extreme that will never be achieved. The problems are not nearly as bad as they were in the past, that is an extreme we left behind long ago. Maybe where you live it has allowed small gang capital use with reduced fear of hotdrops but that is not the case for much of nul or lowsec (especially for smaller groups).
Jump fatigue and reduced ranges for small groups often add up to having to sell everything you own just to move (or deploy). Large groups are not affected in the same way, usually due to extensive access to logistics.
Yes the animation starts at the decline of renter empires - The time Sov was meant to open up so smaller groups stood a chance of taking and holding sov (according to the goals of the blogs released at the time anyway). And yes, to an extent it does allow smaller groups to hold sov - As long as you have enough blues and access to a batfone network.
The biggest problem with Eve is not development it is the players and that is something CCP can't "fix". But development direction could help reduce the effectiveness and need for the N+1 groups - The reworking capitals proposal, does not do that, in fact it does the exact opposite.
As I said, life for small groups is very different to what the large groups encounter.
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
Why can't CCP see the obvious - Large dominating groups are bad for Eve.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 28 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |