Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
BOldMan
Reikoku Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 20:40:00 -
[391]
Carriers are now exactly what their name/class said. Future nerfs are making their name/class a joke. And not a good one.
|
Hyakuchan
Earth Federation Space Force
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 20:47:00 -
[392]
Edited by: Hyakuchan on 31/10/2007 20:47:53
Originally by: infinityshok Your useless-trivia skills are leet. I feel certain there is a prize awaiting you for that at some geek convention.
Actually, I give that prize out. The award is a dictionary with "obscene gestures of the world" pop-up pages.
|
infinityshok
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 20:57:00 -
[393]
Originally by: Hyakuchan Edited by: Hyakuchan on 31/10/2007 20:50:45
Originally by: infinityshok Your useless-trivia skills are leet. I feel certain there is a prize awaiting you for that at some geek convention.
Actually, I give that prize out. The award is a pop-up book entitled "Obscene Gestures of the Klingon Empire."
And you should be proud. Youre a chick magnet I bet.
|
ElCoCo
KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 21:10:00 -
[394]
Honestly, can you devs please stop devising ways to make your game less fun?
This is a universal change, not some buff/nerf to a single race ship and so on.
If 99% of the ppl involved don't like it, then it's almost safe to say it's bad
No realy, I understand your need for ummm.... balance? Why oh why must you add even more tediousness on day to day activites
|
Stellar Vix
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 21:23:00 -
[395]
I say let them get done balancing it before we star yelling hollering and screaming like a bunch of babies, anyways anyone selling a chimera for cheap?
SWA PVP |
Seonae
STK Scientific
|
Posted - 2007.10.31 22:28:00 -
[396]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
It took me a while as I had to break out the CCP Decoder ring, but I've finally translated this:
'Get a Titan and jump bridge freighters, otherwise you do not belong in 0.0'
seriously.. thats what it says
|
Manim Sarecs
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 00:03:00 -
[397]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
There are many valid and constructive points made in this thread. There are also people who's brains are apparently exploding, leaving bloody, panicked gray matter all over it.
In other words, we're doing exactly what you ask of us: replying to a change made on sisi with the passionate fervor inherent in a group of dedicated gamers. Don't get mad at us and summarily dismiss us for loving your game, for showing you how much our time here means to us, for trying to tell you what parts of the game we enjoy the most and want to see enhanced and which parts we hate and want to see pruned or streamlined. You have the cheapest market research on the planet, and we know you use it, we know you listen, we've seen it. Just let us know a little bit, just a hint of your vision.
Read the entirety of what's been posted before responding. We know it's time-consuming and tedious to read people mostly repeating each other over and over again, trying to cull sparks of ingenuity. We do it all the time. It's worth it to me, and I just play the game. |
Kitome Nakatashi
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 00:20:00 -
[398]
I trained for and bought a Thanatos specifically to support mining and pos operations in 0.0. I have decent combat skills, but I've never used nor plan to use my carrier in battle.
There was no Rorqual. There was no possibility of a jump freighter. I put in the training time and bought the ship to do a job. No you are taking that ability away from the carrier. And somehow I doubt you'll trade me a Rorqual for it.. With thousands of people trying to sell carriers and buy Capital Industrials, it's going to be a reasonably long time before I make the switch.
How is this a good thing for the player base? How is this good for the game?
The carrier has been a hauler since it's release. You want to give me a toggle to set between combat mode, logistics mode (laughable) and hauler mode - fine. But leave me the ability to do my job until Rorqs are commonplace.
-Kitome Nakatashi, another disappointed logistics player
p.s. The t2 freighter isn't coming in the upcoming patch, so really doesn't need discussion on this topic.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari AUS Corporation CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 01:11:00 -
[399]
Hey, I just realized that the Fanfest starts today. Would someone please, please, please bring up the issue at the roundtables, and keep bringing it up until we get a straight answer from CCP? ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic EVE Automated Influence Map
|
Stellar Vix
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 02:24:00 -
[400]
Wouldnt surprise me if they came out "this is how we are reinventing carriers complete with several modes of operation and they will all be uber in the roles they are specialized in." And the new stats and abilities would make alot of you drool you may forget you would have to use your carrier for hauling fuel anymore.
But seriously lets get some petition going of lets get the role replacement ships in fist.
SWA PVP |
|
I SoStoned
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 03:44:00 -
[401]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Eve != My Second Job online.
These changes make it just that. Make these jump freighters affordable & accessable before you f*ck up carrier logistics and you might salvage something.
Currently R3 makes me seriously reconsider my subscriptions.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 12:16:00 -
[402]
Originally by: Hyakuchan Edited by: Hyakuchan on 31/10/2007 17:13:30
Originally by: Hutchins CCP is no more obligated to make eve the way I want it than I am to give them money for it. However, if they want myself and a lot of other people to continue giving them money, it might be a good idea if they were to take what we want in EVE into consideration
See there's the thing...
In the MMO world, the boycott bluff always gets called because the marketing/pr team KNOWS that most of it is just talk. The ones who take it seriously enough will quit, but so long as the net change in subscriptions remains positive, it doesn't matter.
MMO publishers don't take threats seriously until subscription growth bottoms out or turns negative.
Yes, and no. Mostly it is just talk. But ask SOE what they were thinking when they introduced their 'Combat Upgrade' and the 'NGE' and what it did to their subscriber numbers in SWG. They had the golden licence with Star Wars Galaxies and they blew it because in the end, when the subscribers really had enough, they quit in huge numbers.
------------------------------------------------
|
Jezzebell
Minmatar Black Knight Buccaneers Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 12:25:00 -
[403]
CCP, I REALLY hope you reconsider this nerf. You are taking away a very important aspect of the carrier, to launch battle-ready ships without having the hassle with fitting and so on... _______________________________
"Hey, watch this!"
|
Gun Babe
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 13:29:00 -
[404]
This isn't a pure nerf, the size/Volume of a lot of ship classes has been reduced a lot. The result is that you can now fit 2 assembled BS and have some room left in a standard carrier. In fact even the industrials have lower volume and you can fit more than 2 itty V's into the bay (can actually open them and put stuff in them too but without any pilot bonuses).
You can store a ship with charges in the ships bay (ammo/cap boosters, didn't try warp disrupt and other probes but I hope). I'm not saying I'm for this changes, its a real pain in the a$$ but its got ups and downs. Carriers are better for BF logistics now (can carry a lot more combat ships, can do uber repping etc.) they just are a bit bleh for industrial logistics.. c'est la vie I used to use my carrier for that too.
All this said, with one thing and the other, the cargo hold on all carriers is a lil bit too small now because carriers need stront (and a lot need cap boosters too), would be nice to see it increased a bit to level things out.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.11.01 21:41:00 -
[405]
Back to the top. ---- AUS Corp Lead Megalomanic EVE Automated Influence Map
|
Amy Wang
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 00:31:00 -
[406]
How about allowing ships to have the following items in cargo just not anything else?
a) ammo & crystals b) drones c) cap charges
that way you could at least store combat rdy ships in a carrier for grabs as its intended to
sure you could always grab that ammo etc from the corp hangar but we all know how well that works in a laggy enviroment
|
Nevada Tan
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 00:46:00 -
[407]
Originally by: Seonae
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
It took me a while as I had to break out the CCP Decoder ring, but I've finally translated this:
'Get a Titan and jump bridge freighters, otherwise you do not belong in 0.0'
seriously.. thats what it says
So what does it say today, with the "freighters can't jump bridge any more" nerf?
♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ I have done a bad thing. |
Kilostream
Caldari Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:02:00 -
[408]
Edited by: Kilostream on 02/11/2007 01:03:09 I think there's nothing I can say here that Grayton has not already said, both more eloquently and more authoritatively than I could manage.
CCP this is an ill-conceived idea.....
I agree wholeheartedly with the player-held notion that you are failing, utterly, to appreciate how much of a grind erecting and maintaining pos infrastructure ALREADY is - we are not getting an easy ride, and getting the freighters and carriers nerfed back-to-back like this could be a mortal blow for eve as a whole, once the 0.0 allainces stop bothering and your longest playing, biggest paying, most loyal customers begin to desert you in their droves.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:33:00 -
[409]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. [...]
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
And who are you???
I hear that there are 10.000 carriers in Eve, so assume that we have 5000+ carrier pilots.
These 5000 people are paying YOUR monthly paycheck CCP Gangleri.
You want constructive posts? Maybe STARTS YOURSELF TO BE CONSTRUCTIVE!
Explain what is wrong with carriers right at the moment, explain why they must not haul things. Explain the logic that carriers can haul ships, that they even can haul ships which have ammo in their cargo, but they cannot haul ships that have anything else there. Explain how you make Eve MORE FUN for the players with these changes!
If you do this first, then there is room to be constructive.
I'm really fed up with such arrogant statements like 'carriers != haulers' and crap like this and no explanations at all.
PEOPLE DON'T WANT THIS!!
|
Raevenor
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:59:00 -
[410]
Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. [...]
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
And who are you???
I hear that there are 10.000 carriers in Eve, so assume that we have 5000+ carrier pilots.
These 5000 people are paying YOUR monthly paycheck CCP Gangleri.
You want constructive posts? Maybe STARTS YOURSELF TO BE CONSTRUCTIVE!
Explain what is wrong with carriers right at the moment, explain why they must not haul things. Explain the logic that carriers can haul ships, that they even can haul ships which have ammo in their cargo, but they cannot haul ships that have anything else there. Explain how you make Eve MORE FUN for the players with these changes!
If you do this first, then there is room to be constructive.
I'm really fed up with such arrogant statements like 'carriers != haulers' and crap like this and no explanations at all.
PEOPLE DON'T WANT THIS!!
This is a good post. Secondly Goonswarm loves Grayton and Stampert our wonderful logistic directors who pretty much work their 2nd job in Eve just keeping everything a-okay. Grayton wrote a very elegant and wonderful post on why this is a bad idea.
CCP has not given very good reasons or some sort of detailed thought-out explanation why this is being even done or considered.
Its pretty hilarious to see people who actually agree with this change have absolutely no idea whats its like operating in 0.0 or haven't done logistics themselves, they just don't have a god damn clue and thus are in a nutshell: ********.
I really have to say the same about CCP's lead testers and development folks can say 'This is needed, **** people who have invested years into their capital characters and ships, we are going do this our way without input from the community'. This is what CCP are currently saying to us.
One CCP Fellow already posted why, in the most snide manner possible without explaining a damn thing which is pathetic given the fact this effects any 0.0 alliance the player base that actually uses carriers extensively for various roles. Since carriers were out they were fine, they are workhorses and combat ships, people didn't see a problem with it for years until CCP suddenly deciding it so.
Instead of focusing on game-breaking issues and more important things like trying to actually fix fighter lag in your god damn python code and improving the game fixing bugs that have been around since release you are essentially fixing things that aren't broken. This is stupidity. I hope you get chewed out at Fanfest for this stupidity.
You really are turning this into SWG. Players strongly give input on why things are a bad idea, X idea gets implemented, people yell at devs, devs ignore players and continue doing what they think is right. Next thing you know any kind of constructive comments or criticism is grounds for forum bans cause you know that worked great for the SWG dev team. This change is the first step towards breaking the game like it has never been broken before, tread very lightly.
|
|
Tonto Auri
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 02:07:00 -
[411]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
Pick and open a dictionary before stating such silliness, please.
If You have trouble with carrier ship maintenance array, just make industrial ships assembled size bigger. As big as You wish. 600,000, 700,000 m3... It will not make any problem for majority of players, just affect carrier pilots. But STOP making such silly changes. And study "Why restrictive solution are bad" article before trying to "balance" something such way again. Any limits should be expected rather than imposed.
Example: You can't put 2,000,000 m3 in 1,000,000 m3 cargobay - expected limitation. You can't put it in cargo because it is loaded with stuff - imposed restriction. You can put item in cargo without any changes to itself (no repackaging etc.), but You should by the strange rule make some strange manipulations - offload cargo from it. -- Thanks CCP for cu<end of sig> |
Awox
Advanced Logistics
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 02:39:00 -
[412]
Originally by: Ford Cruller
Originally by: Grayton
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
irrelevant dude snipped
If you won't listen to me, or anyone else, at least listen to Grayton, he is a logistics director for Goonswarm and obviously knows a lot more about logistics than anyone at CCP.
Yeah, because a whole lot of knowledge and skill goes into moving capitals through a cyno network. OH LORD. I am the only real logistics master in GoonSwarm and you know it.
|
Lyla Lei
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 02:42:00 -
[413]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
Relax guys, maybe the devs fixed the corp hangar so it doesn't take 5 minutes to load a hangar division with one module in it in a system with 2 people... oh wait, this is CCP we are talking about here.
Yeah, this is pretty stupid. CCP hiring straight out of special needs facilities?
|
Gloomy Gus
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 02:46:00 -
[414]
Originally by: Xanetia Ravenfrost I don't mind not having offensive capability if I'm doing a logistics job. However, leaving the only choices for 0.0 logistics either a 40-jump freighter convoy or an 8 billion isk Jump Freighter that won't show up at all until 2 months after Rev3 is shortsighted.
I thought this was a particularly well-worded post and I want it printed again on this page so I'm quoting it.
Also all of Grayton's post on page 1.
Semper Fi,
|
Brka
Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:25:00 -
[415]
Devs are not listening. Will be interesting I guess seeing that Devs do not equal businessmen and don't understand listening to your player base. Crossroads of the game is coming.
Again listen to your people DO NOT do this.
|
Dangerously Cheesey
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:53:00 -
[416]
Originally by: Grayton Ok, as one of the main logistics directors for the largest alliance (numbers wise) in the game, and an owner of a carrier for over a year and now recently a mothership, I think I have a unique perspective when it comes to carriers and logistics.
There is a fundamental difference between PVP and logistics in this game. People PVP because they want to have fun. People do logistics (and by logistics, I mean alliance-level POS fueling and everything it entails) because it HAS to be done in order for the alliance to survive. It is not fun. It is boring, tedious, time consuming work that is completely pointless but that CCP feels is for some reason absolutely necessary for alliances that wish to have space to go through.
It also seems like CCP has this idea in their mind of the "right" way that this boring, tedious, time consuming, pointless task should be going about being completed, and nerf everything that doesn't fall in line to their idea but is still used to do it anyway (case in point: GSCs in indys in carriers). They seemed to be obsessed with this idea of making running POSes as utterly, utterly stupid and boring as possible. We've already got the 6 hour setup times per POS, and the hours spent just getting fuel collected in empire; why not make it even harder to get that fuel moved and get each of those POSes fueled so that even more time can be wasted on trivial tasks? I guess spending hours upon hours upon hours doing tedious jumping of fuel wasn't boring enough for CCP, so they decided to add even more hours on of tedious gate jumping through up to 40 jumps just to fuel. And that's leaving out the additional time needed to be able to get protection so you don't get ganked.
Seriously, does CCP even have any idea about the dedication and time it takes to run an alliance level logistics program? Do they even understand how slow and mind numbing it is? It's easy to say "oh, this isn't hard at all!" to 10, 20, even 30 POSes that need fueling and an already in place infrastructure of bridges. But to have to run a 100+ POS network spanning multiple regions and hundreds of light years without always having the easy to use bridge infrastructure in place? To have to deal with constant, stupid 30 second waits on EVERYTHING that has to be done? To have to sit there and anchor 15 guns and 10 mods on a tower one by one wasting over 7 hours of your life just to get it up and running? If they had ANY idea what it was like to have to do all this on such a large scale, I don't think they could EVER put in changes like this. But they don't. They have no idea what it's like for certain players in their game to have to manage such huge pointless responsibilities because of their game mechanics that they insist on changing with stuff like this to make it even worse.
This, of course, isn't even mentioning the gigantic affects this will have on smaller corps. Say good bye to trying to get any foothold in 0.0. I doubt many smaller corps have the numbers to escort freighters or indys through potentially super-hostile space.
Now, I'm sure some of you are saying, "well duh Grayton, the t2 jump freighters will fix everything!" Ignoring the fact that making these new freighters tech 2 instead of tier 2 is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard and opens a big, huge, gigantic door CCP should not be opening considering the current state of the game (T2 capital ships, that is), do you realize how rare T2 freighters will be? For those that try and make them, there's the ever present threat of losing their BPCs trying to invent them and getting nothing back. The month long copy time. The cost in minerals to make one. These things are going to be stupidly rare, and stupidly expensive. Then there's the minimum 3.5 month training time (freighter V, jdc IV). That's a HUGE gap of time where no one will be able to fly them and no one will be able to use carriers any more for the job.
I just hope CCP realizes what they're getting into.
|
Zylatis
Umbra Congregatio
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 07:50:00 -
[417]
Jesus stop nerfing stuff, you guys got a quota to fill or something?
|
AngelusK
Minmatar FireStar Inc
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 12:48:00 -
[418]
Originally by: CCP Gangleri Carrier != Hauler
Ships will be allowed to carry ammo in their cargo hold even while inside a ship maintenance bay. As it stands now carriers have a ship maintenance bay of 1m on Sisi. Nothing on Sisi is ever final. Please provide constructive feedback with minimal misinformation and speculation where possible.
I reiterate:
Carrier != Hauler
Well, let's see...
Carrier != Hauler, with this nerf. Carrier != PvP ship, with the fighter nerf.
What's left then? ...ah!
Ladies & gentlemen, I give you...
The Capital PvE-Only Plex Gang-Tank!! (ta-daa!)
...at least until CCP eventually nerf the cap rep mod.
|
mamolian
M. Corp M. PIRE
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 13:14:00 -
[419]
Edited by: mamolian on 02/11/2007 13:19:06 Mr Dev,
I play a game, where 5 - 50 people run the infrastructure required to hold space in 0.0 inevitably those people burn out, even with the best of intentions, the bigger the number you make responsible for that infrastructure, you run the risk to allow in spies, and other nasty people who are there simply to destroy that infrastructure from the inside.. The other 500 - 5000 people in the average alliance couldn't be bothered.. either too lazy, to incompetent.. ran POS in the past and think NEVER A*******GAIN!!11oneone etc.. So then you go back to those 5 - 50 people.. the directors.. the CEO's the POS maintenance crew.. who make 0.0 space ownership possible.
These people are also playing this wonderful game.. But with current mechanics.. and time investments to make this all possible.. Eve is a 2nd Job..
Carrier mechanics as they are on Tranquility, combined with current Tranquility mineral compression mechanics make logistics just about bareable your proposed changes will make things difficult beyond belief.. For not only alliance sovereignty logistics.. but Personal logistics of your average capital player with a carrier, who relies on this ship in its current form to move their ships.. and their modules etc between sysems.
Tech 2 freighters.. A ship with no module slots.. with no rig slots.. hence slow.. not only to align and warp.. but between jumps.. Inventable.. Expensive.. Far outside the reach of your average player (nevermind most small alliances), and will not meet the demands of alliance logistics nor will it meet the demands for minerals in 0.0. if you remove carriers ability to haul industrials packed with items. Tier 2.. would be a slight improvement.. but not by much
You want constructive feedback? Leave the carrier alone. Please. PS: what sparked this bollox to begin with? One of the carebear devs get ganked by a carrier or something on their main?
-------------------------------
|
Wet shorts
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 14:20:00 -
[420]
hi era of indastrials swarm a hate u CCP
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |