Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
30048
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 14:30:27 -
[121] - Quote
sero Hita wrote:Solecist Project wrote:I would let every single one who keeps pingponging arguments back and forth be removed from the forums. Banned for lifetime.
Every hypocrite, doomsayer and liar banned. Everyone banned who makes up or deliberately misinterprets data.
Oh and not to forget those who complain about free gifts or the price of the monthly sub.
Ban them all.
Forever.
That is all. Beware of staring too much into the sun, you might go blind on topic: -I would remove FW missions, as they don't fit into the whole idea behind FW (contesting systems, small ship and group pvp) IMO. -Change one of the subsystems of the T3C, so they cannot carry links anymore. I think BCs, CS and CD only should have this ability. - I would also like the ability to fit multiple ships of one type hull at once, with the same fitting. So it is faster when preparing ships for fleets. Hey hey hey, none of these apply to me. I always tell you honestly what I think ... ... and never hide the true meaning behind words.
Sadly that gets me into more trouble than those who deserve it. :P
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
DeadDuck
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:05:27 -
[122] - Quote
Hilti Enaka wrote:The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp?
Been playing EVE since 2005 non-stop, entirely devoted to PVP. For the 1st time ever, I stop playing it!...
You are right, the game has become very risk averse making it very, very boring. So boring that I really I'm not in the mood to play it. Maybe it's just a phase but for someone that was such a hard core player these are news.
What I think are the main problems in EVE?
1) Completely failed sov system. Why go conquer something if it is so dull and you really dont have a reason for it. Make the resources (moon mins, gas clouds whatever being finite and you might have a reason to go conquer something)
2) Super Cap Hyper Inflation. It really killed Sov warfare. The new super cap revamp will not almost for sure adress the main issue. There are simply to many in game.
3) Outposts will be destrutable on a short term. I'm gonna tell you what will happen: during months people will be all happy killing these structures and then, the game will collapse. 0.0 will be really empty cause nobody will want to live in there.
TBH I really don't care at the moment.
|
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
66
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:53:46 -
[123] - Quote
That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions.
Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead. |
Elyia Suze Nagala
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
68
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 15:55:55 -
[124] - Quote
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions.
Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead.
If I could get a forth, people need to stop being little Pusskins are cry OP, cry about their experiences, blah, blah. |
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
30086
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 16:07:34 -
[125] - Quote
Elyia Suze Nagala wrote:That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions.
Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead. It's less that they have one. It's more that 99.9% of the broad mass feel entitled to having one ... ... while being clueless about how to form a proper one, plus DunningKruger.
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
|
Arla Sarain
725
|
Posted - 2016.01.04 17:53:43 -
[126] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:Hilti Enaka wrote:The game has become very risk averse... Perhaps you should stop flying cheap ships and then tell me it's risk averse. I assure you if you're flying in something bigger and more expensive than an atron with T1 rigs you'll find the game a little more interesting. Try fitting up a couple of blingy cruisers or faction battleships, go do some pvp in low or nul and then come back and tell me how risk averse it is. Troll... Thread should be moved to reddit so posts like this could be downvoted and not displayed with the threshold. |
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 13:28:18 -
[127] - Quote
Arla Sarain wrote: Revisit flight/movement physics.
Defo - I think the days of being able to lock a target and F1 are becoming numbered. I'd like to see a the game take on the challenge of creating a system where the user can decide what to target, This whole shield, Armour, hull business can be vastly improved if it were to be attached to being able to target and destroy certain systems. |
Solecist Project
The Scope Gallente Federation
30348
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 14:02:52 -
[128] - Quote
Hilti Enaka wrote:Arla Sarain wrote: Revisit flight/movement physics.
Defo - I think the days of being able to lock a target and F1 are becoming numbered. I'd like to see a the game take on the challenge of creating a system where the user can decide what to target, This whole shield, Armour, hull business can be vastly improved if it were to be attached to being able to target and destroy certain systems. You have to get through shields first, though ... ... which means a global metashift towards shieldbuffer ... ... to avoid having systems on the ship being attacked.
RoAnnon wrote:
O Bob, wonGÇÖt you buy a new Svipul for me
I just scanned for sites and I found a C3
The fleet is now forming, FC wants T3s
O Bob, wonGÇÖt you buy a new Svipul for me
|
Notorious Fellon
360
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 14:55:40 -
[129] - Quote
1: Change Logi so it cannot perma-rep (both PVP and PVE methods). Make it strategic, not infinite.
Many options to make this happen. Example: make remote reps require a fuel or make them never cap stable and make logi ships unable to receive cap transfer.
2: Fix ECM and ECCM. Reducing maximum target count is an interesting proposal mentioned earlier. Personally I think we need ships to have "Utility Mid Slots" which cannot contain any tank. ECCM, Tracking, Targetting mods would then be a viable option on more ships without risking tank balance.
3: Fix SOV. Latest iteration is not even close to any of the ideas proposed in several threadnaughts.
Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
|
SetSail ForEpicFail
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 15:04:02 -
[130] - Quote
i whould whitout any form of warnings turn jita into a nullsec system and surrounding systems into lowsec.
than grab my popcorns and watch the forum drama |
|
Soltys
42
|
Posted - 2016.01.05 17:52:47 -
[131] - Quote
1) Change undepletable static resources to dynamic, depletable and slowly self-renewable to some other resource from the same group in some other place. That obviously includes not only moon goo, but also other quasi-static resources diligently respawning or refilling in same places.
2) Divide volume of ammo pieces by 10. At least. Or add separate ammo bay to all combat ships.
3) Start reading and implementing stuff from "small things" thread, instead of de-facto treating it as a local trashcan.
Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2016.01.18 09:57:51 -
[132] - Quote
So I guess i am looking foward to seeing the demise of off grid boosters.
|
TheDamned
Galactic Relic Hunters Unity
14
|
Posted - 2016.01.19 05:48:30 -
[133] - Quote
Personally, I LOVE having to use a skill to level it. I remember doing 8x8 in Ultima Online for skill increases. haha
Something about using skills and seeing .01 increase is somehow exciting and forces people to actually do what they are trying to level up for.
|
Djsaeu
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2016.01.19 13:49:28 -
[134] - Quote
The name of the "Ship Tree" really someone could of came up with a better name. How about....
CASE
C: Concord A: Acknowledged S: Ship E: Encyclopedia
Just a thought on that. |
Trader20
Hedion University Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2016.01.20 02:52:04 -
[135] - Quote
1. More PvE content. After years of pvp I'm just discovering that Eve has such great content and story that it's a shame that pve is pushed to the side. The Eve universe is certainly more interesting then gate/station camping and kill mail whoring and the drama that comes with interacting with mostly emo personalities, yes you.
2. ECM, do something, anything. Make a list of ideas to change it and throw a dart at it to choose.
3. Option to turn off nebulae for improved performance (laptop users, multi boxers). Not all space has to be a cotton candy lava lamp. |
Battlingbean
Star Frontiers Brotherhood of Spacers
35
|
Posted - 2016.01.20 07:50:47 -
[136] - Quote
IGÇÖd like to change 4 things. However, last change would just be fun. 1)Micro warp drives: Ships are way too fast. IGÇÖve thought that ever since I first saw a micro warp driving ship back in the day. 500+% bonus to velocity? LOLwut? Of course IGÇÖll fit that to every ship I own. The speed and drawbacks should be less extreme. 2)Remove or Redesign Black ops bridging: Completely broken mechanic. Dude can be afk and un-removable in your system, then suddenly not be afk and have 20 friends backing him up. IGÇÖve been on both sides of this encounter and neither is particularly fun. Without black ops bridging, afk cloakers are no longer a problem. 3)Remove kill boards: The true cause of risk aversion. Also, I shouldnGÇÖt be able to look up everything about someoneGÇÖs flying habits 4)Redesign Rail guns and Artillery: -Make rail guns into sniper rifles. Give them High alpha, extreme optimal, but low tracking and falloff, low ROF and high cap use per shot for difficult sustained fire. Do much more kinetic damage than thermal. -Blasters the opposite. Excellent tracking, ROF, cap usage for sustained fire and great dps, but low optimal, falloff and alpha damage. Do more thermal damage than kinetic. - Then Artillery is the more moderate long range weapon with no cap use and high falloff etc.
Also ECM is fine. It has an important position in fleet compositions, and suffers a myriad of counters last of which is ECCM. Please stop whining about it.
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
86
|
Posted - 2016.01.20 14:19:07 -
[137] - Quote
Just seen this handbags in local. GG
[13:21:45] Person A > lol? [13:21:59] Person A > why warp off [13:22:09] Person B > I know your game [13:22:30] Person A > What? [13:22:50] Person B > I've fought you 6 times in the last 2 weeks and I've realized you don't fly alone. [13:23:21] Person A > Meh OK dude, don't pvp and be safe then [13:24:19] Person B > Listen I've played the game for 7 years, I've watched the game go from "lets go and shoot stuff" to "Dude stop dying your ruining our killboard" [13:25:43] Person A > Go join Risk aversion club [13:27:27] Person B > Wut? You want to lay that one on me and you're the one flying around with ECM back-up, [13:28:54] Person B > I couldn't care less about losing my ships as it's only pixels but I certainly am not just going to sit there whilst your ECM, scramb and neut paralyze me. |
Nana Skalski
Poseidaon
3283
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 07:54:24 -
[138] - Quote
looks of: Imicus Burst Bantam
( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ GòáGò¼GòªGò¼Gòú - my sandcastle
( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ <=X - my yacht
|
Professor Humbert
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
11
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 08:27:05 -
[139] - Quote
3 things, eh?
1) Too many windows. Especially chat windows.
2) increased number of overview tabs active
3) Allow us to move the ship control panel in vertical axis, too
|
Thorian Baalnorn
Bad Influence I N G L O R I O U S
19
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 17:09:37 -
[140] - Quote
Without reading the other post in this thread i would change a few things. Trying not to go into to much detail( which is hard for me) :
1) I would shrink empire down to one or two regions per faction. I would expand null into current empire space. In the middle of null space at roughly intervals of 20-30 jumps from low sec would be faction( such as caladari, amarr, etc) faction outpost regions or constellations. These would consist of a few high sec systems and 2-3 times many low sec regions. surrounded by null space. My version of eve would be a spider web system. The center would be empire as described above. The intersections between two points on a web would be like outpost systems. and the threads to those would be low sec and all the empty space would be null.
Then outpost systems would have a special sec status called Osec. this would be .3 lower than an equivalent empire sec in terms of PVE interaction but still have the high sec security. Example: .7 Osec would have the same security in relation to players that high sec 1.0 has but have the pve content of a .7 system. This would be an incentive to get people out of the center of the web, even if they dont want to dip their feet into null.
Furthermore i would make a simple t3 industrial that has a few options on a single subsystem slot including high capacity and jump drive( like black ops). I would make a super freighter( super cap) with high capacity and long jump range( about 15-18 LY max). Both of these could use "Concord Jump Beacons" in certain high sec systems only to allow a decent flow of trade across the spread out empire.
This would later be followed by the ability of players on the outskirts of known space to explore new wormholes with new rats and basically add these systems( if they wish) to empire by setting up warp gates and settling the system( local would be tied to having a warp gate. Players would literally be able to expand the known eve universe through their actions. Make the sandbox bigger rather than playing in the current size one.
Overall i would expect this to spread people out more across eve and create some very interesting opportunities across all professions and give players a ton more of options on how to affect their sandbox.
2) I would redo alliances and the whole alliance system. Not really sure yet on how i would change this as i havent thought much about it. But big alliances would be a thing of the past, huge blue lists would be a thing of the past, coalitions would be a thing of the past.
One thing i thought of in this regard is to limit alliance size to around 2000-3000 members or maybe 100-1000 unique members( alts do not count but their would be strict and dire consequences for trying to work around this limitation including the deletion of characters or forcing them to stay in a NPC corp for a year or something. no limit on number of corps in an alliance. Allowing blue lists but they cost an increasing amount of money for number of people that are blued. IE: some small alliances in an area blue each other and you have about 1000 blues, its a manageable amount of isk to maintain the list. If you want to blue 1/2 of eve your going to pay hundreds of billions per week to maintain that list. The same with red and orange standings.
My goal would to get people to be more diverse and have to make choices about how much space to take and how to defend it. rather than " i got 6 alliances that are blue so we are good for 40 jumps in any direction. And it would make alliances depend on themselves to be more self sufficient and help discourage renting. ( honestly i would probably just make renting illegal. It encourages people to take space they dont need or use and discourages others from trying to take space. and thats a catalyst for the current situation in eve null)
3) Lastly , and CCP is already working on this, i would make it harder to blob and take space with blobs. I would create an environment in which little alliances from 100 to 1000 members could thrive. But alliances could still take a decent amount of space( no hard limit) but it becomes decreasingly hard to defend a larger empire.
My overall goal in eve would be to spread people out more and make it less appealing for alliances to just doze over a bunch of other alliances and rent the space out but still maintain the concept of " if you want space you have to defend it." Right now we have " if you want space you have to rent it, or have a 300-400 man blob with a large bank account"
You would have the option to take new space or to take someone elses space. But your going to work for your space either way and your going to have to work to keep it.
|
|
Ginnie
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
78
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 17:23:03 -
[141] - Quote
I'm not gonna lie, I am extremely risk adverse. I only fly a T1 ship with T1 equip while exploring Low Sec.
I won't scan down and loot a Data or Relic site if anyone else is in the system. If I'm in the middle of a hack and someone appears in Local, I immediately unlock the target, cloak and wait for them to leave. If they don't leave, then I leave.
Other players want my tears and I am not going to give them any.
And before you ask, this is not a forum alt, but Ginnie doesn't get a lot of action. Manufacturing rigs out of salvage and improving blueprints...not much action, but profitable nonetheless.
All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream. -Edgar Allan Poe
|
IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
1324
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 18:41:42 -
[142] - Quote
1) Remove RMT altogether. Yea I know it won't happen but the question is 3 things I would change not CCP
2) Make solo play at higher levels more difficult. Both in PVP and PVE. Eve is an MMO so I think the second "M" should be encouraged.
3) Add more complexity to the game... This game needs more complexity because at it's core it's very borning... "Press F1, Die, Reship, Repeat". CCP has been on a path to simplify things for new players and I feel that's a big mistake. Yes complex may intimidate new players at first but in six months new players aren't new anymore and simple will bore them. |
Rykker Bow
The Scope
225
|
Posted - 2016.01.21 19:16:42 -
[143] - Quote
I think I'd change forum rules to prohibit 'what would you change' and 'xxxxxx is way over powered' threads.
That's all. I think the game is awesome the way it is. Problems or challenges that come up, there's usually a work around.
The Mjolnir Bloc - Lowsec PvP for the sophisticated -
The Mjolnir Bloc Killboards
|
Murauke
Assisted Homicide
15
|
Posted - 2016.01.22 11:05:51 -
[144] - Quote
IIshira wrote: 1) Remove RMT altogether. Yea I know it won't happen but the question is 3 things I would change not CCP
2) Make solo play at higher levels more difficult. Both in PVP and PVE. Eve is an MMO so I think the second "M" should be encouraged.
3) Add more complexity to the game... This game needs more complexity because at it's core it's very borning... "Press F1, Die, Reship, Repeat". CCP has been on a path to simplify things for new players and I feel that's a big mistake. Yes complex may intimidate new players at first but in six months new players aren't new anymore and simple will bore them.
Not sure about #2. I get it , it's an MMO meant to be played in groups, problem is if you look at the research of gamification it says that true engagement is achieved when everyone in the group feels they contributed to the task. A lot of the tasks in PVP are just "lock, f1, repeat" and whilst yes it is a MMO, the people more likely to provide content are the onces that prefer doing things solo.
|
Amber Starview
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
62
|
Posted - 2016.01.22 15:20:10 -
[145] - Quote
1 ... More lore and more old battle locations like BR Titan graveyard but they should be all over space with attached battle write up telling us about what exactly happened and why/when 2 ... Major Trade hub located only in dangerous space ,other smaller in high but nothing bigger than say rens or hek 3 ... Removal of npc corps
|
Nikita Shirakami
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP RAZOR Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2016.01.23 10:46:12 -
[146] - Quote
I'm mainly a miner \ industry player (inb4 don't mine)
- Make mining interactive similar to the hacking mini game, give us huge asteroids where we have to manually direct our mining lasers through a 3d model of the asteroid in an ore scanner window, to access the best ores and if we screw up we hit a gas pocket and our ship gets damaged.
- Cruiser Class mining vessels pretty please... Mining is the cornerstone of Eve and we don't get any love at all
|
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
382
|
Posted - 2016.01.23 16:12:32 -
[147] - Quote
1. A new way of altering ships. When ships are balanced, instead of changing all existing ships to match the new versions, just change the blueprints and leave the ships alone. So potentially somebody could still have a years-old Ishtar with full drone bonus - but it would be rare, of limited supply, valuable, perhaps a collector's item to not be used again. Or somebody could have a pre-buff version of a ship that drops in value. Ship descriptions would have version info, along with their actual model-specific stats.
2. Add terrain. I'm not sure how exactly this would work in a wide open 3D space, but it would be very interesting tactically to have features like cover, high-ground, and narrow passes. Imagine a small group of 30 pilots who live in an area and know the terrain, know where to hide, where to ambush from - imagine a larger gang of 300 pilots looking to create conflict. Currently the group of 30 would have an extremely difficult time going toe-to-toe with the larger group, but with knowledge of the area can use tactics to harass and pick off targets and be highly mobile...
3. Make resource wealth dynamic. Add the equivalent to famines, floods, gold rushes, ecological collapses, overfishing, diseases, droughts, and earthquakes. A lot of real-world conflict is driven by big changes like these - imagine if a disaster in Deklein started a massive refugee migration. Or if an extremely valuable material was discovered in Fountain.
And for the heck of it, some other ideas:
4. Get rid of TCUs. Get rid of iHUBs. Make the wealth of a system available to anybody who happens to be there. Therefore, a system is "owned" by a group simply by that group having a presence there and exploiting the system's resources and driving away other groups. The only difference between SOV null and NPC null is NPC null has NPC stations.
5. Give every ship in highsec that's fitted with modules or drones that can be used offensively a suspect timer. So mining ships and haulers still get CONCORD protection, but Catalysts and Nightmares don't. They have guns - they can protect themselves. CONCORD has other things to worry about, like Drifters. This would bring a lot of (much needed, IMO) combat to highsec, without disrupting industrial activities more than usual. Miners would have to arrange combat protection to deal with belt rats, unless they wanted to be suspects themselves. The main downside is that security missions would take a big hit. Not sure what to do about that one. Highsec Incursions taking a hit is, I think, generally a positive thing.
6. Adjust the relationship between ship speed, ship spacing and engagement range. Currently a thousand ships can occupy a very small volume of space, and in many ways, particularly with anchoring and F1-ing, act as a single much more powerful ship. Imagine if the game mechanics were adjusted such that those thousand ships had to be spread out over hundreds of kilometers? Fleet positioning would become much more important. Tank squads to the front, sniper wings at the rear, logistics spread out to cover as many as possible. Flanking maneuvers would become meaningful. Imagine if tank was split into six individually adjustable segments - fore, aft, starboard, port, upper, lower - such that a ship's heading becomes even more important.
A lot of this this would be a hugely impactful change to how combat is done in EVE - for all I know it could ruin the game, I'm just brainstorming here so no flames, okay?
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy ChaosTheory.
2403
|
Posted - 2016.01.23 16:26:55 -
[148] - Quote
1) Dynamic distribution of resources (areas with tons of people in them become devoid of 'natural resources' (rocks, moon goo, rats, agent missions etc etc) after a time) CONCORD protection could be factored into this as well, though I guess it would be a huge mega project that would change the game quite significantly.
2) Collisions? I don't know what to call this exactly - by this I don't mean ramming that causes damage but stop letting us shoot through stations, asteroids, POS shields, titans, etc etc.
3) Bring back big explosions of torps and cruise missiles :D I'm not even joking, I don't want the silly huge shockwave explosions that torpedoes used to make but something that has a bit more oomph than what we have at the moment.
That all I can think of now. |
Hairtrigger
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
44
|
Posted - 2016.01.23 16:32:49 -
[149] - Quote
1. sack hilmar
2. sack hilmar
3.sack hilmar
untill this tool is gone from eve for good its gonna keep going down hill with pay to win and other money grab ideas |
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
698
|
Posted - 2016.01.23 23:18:29 -
[150] - Quote
focus on maintaining disparate types of play zones and avoid more rebalance. rethink selling skill points finally focus on additions to mining instead of just new UI and object looks...
My posts here are going to evolve over time due to the fact that EVE is not static.
-á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á-
[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |