Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
46
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 09:20:54 -
[1] - Quote
EVE is dying and no use to argue. Those who doubt - just follow the link and spend couple minutes http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility Well i think that CCP realize it. So befor my post turn into TLDR i write my suggestions to prevent death and make this game attractive again. Most of my suggestions had individual post allready and i want to bring it all in one. Here they are:
- remove local in null-sec / low-sec - remove tactical destroyers at all (this is the dumbest ship in EVE ever) - remove anomalies like haven, sanctum, etc. resp in sov space by military hub - remove rapid launchers or nurf it - change cyno mechanics - replace NPC bounty with loot only except belts and mission rewards - double up the mineral cost of capital ships - boost Battleships - rebalance T3 cruisers closer to T2 cruisers (their main distinction must be their flexibility but not overwhelming parameters) - replace armor repair bonus with armor ammount bonus for subcapital ships
also i'd say some more about sov space. i dont like current hub system. i mean i don't like that its too dumb. i think it should work for constelation, but not for one system. for example military hub could rise the chance of officer spawn in belts, plus the ammount of DEDs in it. also DEDs and mining anomalies should be explored as it was before. it will make people to move in region instead of sitting in one system. so let the hubs just rise the density of DEDs and mining signatures up to x2-x4 among regular null-sec and also this will attract pilots to come in this sov space to run DEDs. more fights more player versus player content.
thanks for your attention, and lets discuss it and bring up your suggestions here. |
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1078
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 09:34:28 -
[2] - Quote
So your solution to make the game more interesting is:
remove remove remove
That doesn't seem very exciting to me. Maybe some more detail about how you think all of these will actually help, since you seem to be blaming falling numbers on just a few ships and mechanics.
Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 09:51:33 -
[3] - Quote
correct. first of all ccp should remove all mistakes they did before. those mistakes that killing eve now. except local. it was always but it got into bad stuff with time, so no it should be removed. WH space was a step to it but ccp forgot to spread it further. as i told i was talking about many suggestions in other topics. like a cyno rebalance here https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=492415 |
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1078
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 10:00:16 -
[4] - Quote
Good luck getting CCP to look at any of this.
You've made absolutely no solid argument at all other than 'this is what I think', but what you think is no better than what someone else thinks, even if it's different to yours.
You'll need more credible arguments and details than that.
Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
|
Rivr Luzade
Viziam Amarr Empire
2755
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 10:01:58 -
[5] - Quote
Teddy KGB wrote:- replace armor repair bonus with armor ammount bonus for subcapital ships. But the shield boost bonuses on ships in combination in particular with Cancer ASB are fine?
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1252
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 10:46:31 -
[6] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Teddy KGB wrote:- replace armor repair bonus with armor ammount bonus for subcapital ships. But the shield boost bonuses on ships in combination in particular with Cancer ASB are fine?
One of the things I have never understood is why I can fit 3 ASBs but no more than one AAR.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 11:06:03 -
[7] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Teddy KGB wrote:- replace armor repair bonus with armor ammount bonus for subcapital ships. But the shield boost bonuses on ships in combination in particular with Cancer ASB are fine? no not fine. forgot to mention shield, corrected. |
Yodik
Dwarfed ORE
18
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 11:07:02 -
[8] - Quote
also remove random holes and keep just statics, except thera.
-Æ -+-Ä-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-+-+-+-Å-é-+-+-¦ -ü-+-é-â-¦-å-+-+ - -¦-¦-ç-¦-¦ Prospect.
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 11:07:40 -
[9] - Quote
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:Good luck getting CCP to look at any of this.
You've made absolutely no solid argument at all other than 'this is what I think', but what you think is no better than what someone else thinks, even if it's different to yours.
You'll need more credible arguments and details than that. all argues in separate threads, kid. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1252
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 11:15:27 -
[10] - Quote
All doubling the mineral requirements on capital ships would do is further cement the power of large groups that already have more of them than they can count. In one swoop you've dramatically increased both the value of their assets and the difficulty of trying to compete with them.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 12:29:58 -
[11] - Quote
i understand that it's impossible to ask to remove tactical destroyers, but at least they should be tweaked. large signature radius, slower speed, less lock range, bigger price etc.. |
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
1011
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 12:53:14 -
[12] - Quote
You need to re-name your topic to Teddy KGB Want This - CCP Make It Happen.
There is nothing on it I agree with. And for the record the T3 in all forms needs to be removed from the game, there is no way to balance them because the basic concept and/or the implementation is flawed. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions O.U.Z.O. Alliance
1421
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 12:59:07 -
[13] - Quote
Teddy KGB wrote:i understand that it's impossible to ask to remove tactical destroyers, but at least they should be tweaked. large signature radius, slower speed, less lock range, bigger price etc..
You do know that only one t3 destroyer is very unbalanced and "SURPRISE" it is not from the technological more superior race whom invented shields in the first place.
The Jackdaw and the hecate did come pre-nerfed. The Confessor is fine. An Ibis is not a proper ship to engage a Confessor, zee end.
What would be nice though is if the Caldari, the Gallente and the Amarr would get an interdictor destroyer class ship. The sla- errm minmatar have had one for years.
It would be time now to introduce the other ones..
Eve Minions is recruiting. Learn from about pvp, learn about ships and how to fly them correctly. Small gang and solo action in high, low and nullsec and w-space alike.
We will teach you everything you need and want to know.
|
Merchant Rova
Pathway to the Next
41
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:14:41 -
[14] - Quote
I seriously think this is the dumbest thread of all time.
Yodik wrote:also remove random holes and keep just statics, except thera.
You understand how statics work right?
P-NXT is recruiting.
|
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:15:22 -
[15] - Quote
Donnachadh wrote:You need to re-name your topic to Teddy KGB Want This - CCP Make It Happen.
There is nothing on it I agree with. And for the record the T3 in all forms needs to be removed from the game, there is no way to balance them because the basic concept and/or the implementation is flawed. and they should. i've allready was one who told them to make t2 logistic frigate and they did and it was not bad at all. |
Teddy KGB
Crushing Power of Gallente
47
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:19:36 -
[16] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:All doubling the mineral requirements on capital ships would do is further cement the power of large groups that already have more of them than they can count. In one swoop you've dramatically increased both the value of their assets and the difficulty of trying to compete with them. you mean that if capital price will double up than the loss for big alliance wont be more expansive? |
Yodik
Dwarfed ORE
18
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:21:01 -
[17] - Quote
Merchant Rova wrote:I seriously think this is the dumbest thread of all time. Yodik wrote:also remove random holes and keep just statics, except thera. You understand how statics work right? until u dont warp on them, yes. remove that option too and make static available from both side all period.
-Æ -+-Ä-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-+-+-+-Å-é-+-+-¦ -ü-+-é-â-¦-å-+-+ - -¦-¦-ç-¦-¦ Prospect.
|
Yodik
Dwarfed ORE
18
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:27:01 -
[18] - Quote
Teddy KGB wrote:Elenahina wrote:All doubling the mineral requirements on capital ships would do is further cement the power of large groups that already have more of them than they can count. In one swoop you've dramatically increased both the value of their assets and the difficulty of trying to compete with them. you mean that if capital price will double up than the loss for big alliance wont be more expansive? explain them first, which permits need for supers building.
-Æ -+-Ä-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-+-+-+-Å-é-+-+-¦ -ü-+-é-â-¦-å-+-+ - -¦-¦-ç-¦-¦ Prospect.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
26909
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 13:27:09 -
[19] - Quote
The only thing needed to get a full bingo card is something something AFK cloaking.
Civilised behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
2236
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 14:35:41 -
[20] - Quote
If he adds in: "remove cyno jammers and system upgrades" "remove citadel space magic and put the contents of destroyed player made structures in a loot table or scrap heap"
I'd be willing to give it a shot. It looks like a lot of his ideas are about kicking botting in the goji berries and putting some actual risk back into the game. I can see where the average null bear will hate all of his thinking. Killing of the cash cow and all.
Big picture, if they don't get the game back on its original track to success, but keep going with the gimmicky stuff - we're pretty much riding this thing to the fast approaching end of the line. SOV null has been stale and boring for years and just too damn safe. That drives bored players away AND allows a few large power blocks to basically cockblock new groups from entering sov null as independents. So HS is filling up w/ guys who won't live under the SOV null establishments thumb and SOV subscriptions are falling off due to boredom.
Another good idea for the game would be to make the loss rate of supers > production rate of supers. For as long as it takes to remove the APEX fleet reality from the game. I get that some folks get off on it, but the majority of the game would rather do without it (and based on active players logging in they are voting with their feets)
These things may seem like suck for some for the current day, but at some point if you want to be bitching on the Eve forums 10 years from now, some of the bad stuff in the game (even if you currently benefit from it) has to go. CCP needs to throw away the short term goggles and get back to the long game. (alpha clones and ship skins are not going to get this done) |
|
Cade Windstalker
560
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 14:46:18 -
[21] - Quote
Oh gods these are terrible...
Teddy KGB wrote:- remove local in null-sec / low-sec - remove tactical destroyers at all (this is the dumbest ship in EVE ever) - remove anomalies like haven, sanctum, etc. resp in sov space by military hub - remove rapid launchers or nurf it - change cyno mechanics - replace NPC bounty with loot only except belts and mission rewards - double up the mineral cost of capital ships - boost Battleships - rebalance T3 cruisers closer to T2 cruisers (their main distinction must be their flexibility but not overwhelming parameters) - replace armor/shield repair bonus with ammount bonus for subcapital ships
- Would **** off Null and WH space players. No local is a characteristic of Wormholes, not Null.
- This is just a terrible idea in general. "I don't like this, remove it" is a good way to **** players off not retain them. T3Ds need a rework, not removal.
- Yes, because this wouldn't totally **** off all of Null... this sounds like an "I'm bitter that I can't get out into null and farm ISK" suggestion.
- How, exactly? lol
- This is just economically terrible to a ludicrous degree, not to mention is sure to **** people off.
- This sounds like a pissed off miner suggestion, and would also seriously **** off players.
- Battleships are fine, they're not meant to dominate the game. They get strong and consistent use in pretty much all areas of the game, they don't need a big buff.
- There's already a T3C Tiericide rebalance yet to happen. Complaining that T3 Cruisers are imbalanced before they've gotten their scheduled rebalance is like complaining that water is wet.
- This is just a terrible suggestion in general. It removes a solidly useful bonus for a questionably useful one that's almost functionally identical to a resist bonus *except worse* because it doesn't help remote repair. This effectively makes the game less interesting and more uniform.
Suggestions like this to 'save' the game are why I'm glad we have CCP as a filter against bad ideas... |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1253
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 14:50:06 -
[22] - Quote
Teddy KGB wrote:Elenahina wrote:All doubling the mineral requirements on capital ships would do is further cement the power of large groups that already have more of them than they can count. In one swoop you've dramatically increased both the value of their assets and the difficulty of trying to compete with them. you mean that if capital price will double up than the loss for big alliance wont be more expansive?
It will be more expensive for everyone, but the big guys can better absorb that loss because they already have massive piles of cap ships, and they already have massive piles of ISK, so they can afford to replace the ones they lose. It will hurt smaller entities far more, because they have neither the ships nor the ISK to absorb the losses as readily. You'd actually tighten the stranglehold on null by the largest entities because eventually, they'd be the only ones who could afford to build caps in any kind of numbers
Contrary to popular belief, making things cost more does far less harm to large entities because they can spread the cost around more. It's the small groups that get shafted.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
2237
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 14:56:43 -
[23] - Quote
Getting rid of local in null would **** of null bears. WH pilots would be overjoyed. The split would be the null players w/ wh characters. Not sure where they would fall out.
You seem more worried about pissing off players than making the game interesting and viable for the long haul. You can't build a legacy on instant gratification. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2348
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 15:00:32 -
[24] - Quote
You guys are being too harsh.
Unlike many posters, this OP managed to consolidate all of his horrible ideas into one easily ignored (or mocked, whatever you're into) thread.
There's a certain degree of nobility in that, I think.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1253
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 15:22:31 -
[25] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Getting rid of local in null would **** of null bears. WH pilots would be overjoyed. The split would be the null players w/ wh characters. Not sure where they would fall out.
You seem more worried about pissing off players than making the game interesting and viable for the long haul. You can't build a legacy on instant gratification.
I'd actually love to see local tied to sov. I seem to remember seeing something about CCP considering that idea.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
2237
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 15:38:04 -
[26] - Quote
Elenahina wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:Getting rid of local in null would **** of null bears. WH pilots would be overjoyed. The split would be the null players w/ wh characters. Not sure where they would fall out.
You seem more worried about pissing off players than making the game interesting and viable for the long haul. You can't build a legacy on instant gratification. I'd actually love to see local tied to sov. I seem to remember seeing something about CCP considering that idea.
No local. Period. There is nothing that large blocks can't purchase or grind. If you tie local availability to anything you're just hurting the little guys and boringass business as usual for the big guys. There NEEDS to be a mindset change away from tying things to SOV, SOV upgrades and that sort of thing. CCP got talked into trench warfare a few years back and that's when things started to get sour.
Eve would be a lot better off down the road if the ONLY benefit to owning SOV was the ability to say "I own this, come at me bro" |
Angelink Liffe
Angels of xXRevivaLXx EMPIRE OF LIBERTY
1
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 16:21:39 -
[27] - Quote
ccp, dont kill pvp content! change cyno mechanics! |
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 16:54:53 -
[28] - Quote
The only thing I can agree with is the fact that the EVEOffline's statistics are sad. I don't think killing half the current "endgame" content would solve anything, more like make the older players quit - with all of their alts. Everyone is complaining about T3Cs, they probably need some rework, I didn't tried them yet personally. T3Ds are the coolest ships in the game with all of their transformations. OP said they should be removed, I say add 4 more: neuter/nosfer bonus for amarr, drones for gallente, railgun-sniper for caldari, rockets/missiles for minmatar to put them in their- (now we're both wrong - probably) According to some people on twitter (which is the most reliable source, as we all know) there were 1.5 million newly registered players last year, half of them dropped the game within 2 hours. The problem isn't the endgame, but the early game content, which is being reworked by ... CCPGhost maybe? I don't remember this for sure. |
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
1097
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 17:32:43 -
[29] - Quote
Dior Ambraelle wrote:The only thing I can agree with is the fact that the EVEOffline's statistics are sad. I don't think killing half the current "endgame" content would solve anything, more like make the older players quit - with all of their alts. Everyone is complaining about T3Cs, they probably need some rework, I didn't tried them yet personally. T3Ds are the coolest ships in the game with all of their transformations. OP said they should be removed, I say add 4 more: neuter/nosfer bonus for amarr, drones for gallente, railgun-sniper for caldari, rockets/missiles for minmatar to put them in their- (now we're both wrong - probably) According to some people on twitter (which is the most reliable source, as we all know) there were 1.5 million newly registered players last year, half of them dropped the game within 2 hours. The problem isn't the endgame, but the early game content, which is being reworked by ... CCPGhost maybe? I don't remember this for sure.
It's a year later and you haven't tried them? Oh gosh... where to start.
No. No more T3 anything. Part of the fun of EvE online is that you have a wonderfully deep and wide array of ships that can all interact with each other, and all fly differently, with trademark strengths and weaknesses. The curse of the T3D is that they do everything better - they simultaneously invalidated frigates, destroyers, and cruisers.
Everything wrong with EvE can trace itself back to diminishing the diversity of ships. Jump fatigue, AegisSov, and Citadels basically made capitals terrible. Carriers were interesting, and forced a good segue into a cap fight, but they axed that too. T3Ds basically took T1 frigates. destroyers. and cruisers out of the game. Warp speed changes basically took BS out of the game.
We want to play EvE online. We are given instead a handful of ships. Therein lay the problem.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
|
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
839
|
Posted - 2016.09.27 17:44:07 -
[30] - Quote
Teddy KGB wrote: - replace NPC bounty with loot only except belts and mission rewards.
CCP had this before. Drone poop loot and better loot drops on non-drone rats.
Drone poop pulled by miner request, it was a fair amount of minerals. As I recall a few drone missions and you could roll off a BC from the assembly line at least if you made them yourself. This how I fed my production lines a little back in the day as I built and ran missions.
Mission loot nerfed to the ground by miner (again) and pure industrialist types requests. Former, mineral whines again. Latter hated t1 dropped. Some half assed line of logic since rats drop it no one is buying it. Half assed being no one buys t1 anyway, meta is better and even noobs learn this fast. By and large the only people who use t1 are t2 builders. And by and large we have our own t1 bp's for the base t1 item anyway...needed for invention copies at the minimum. Why the hell would I pay someone else to make my stuff. especially post industrial change where importance of ME was castrated. In short order we all make at same ME now.
Sales spike this did not create. As instead of low balling buy orders for t1 loot drops (or using our own if we ran missions too, I did) when this happened we just made our own t1 items.
that and blitzing is common for mission runners anyway. Its about the lp//hour a lot in mission running. Looking at the get the quafe mission for example. Simple enough, grab the supply of quafee. Drop in fast, open can, leave. You can kill the rats in this mission if desired. For blitz purists, the payout not there to do this. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |