| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
1. Nullification and Interdiction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ziranda Hakuli wrote: Bubbles..... I feel the bubbles are just fine as they are. they are many options within the game to get around them or to hot drop some corp hiding behind the wall of bubbles. remember that Covert Cyno hot drop. and i S...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2017.02.04 17:34:19
|
2. Nullification and Interdiction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Anthar Thebess wrote: Why this discussion start now, before CSM campaign, and not like few months earlier? What happened in last week, that so many CSM people started to ask questions about obvious things that annoy players? 'obvious' isn'...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2017.02.01 14:53:55
|
3. Nullification and Interdiction - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Afternoon folks, I'm looking to spark some discussion on a topic, to guage player reactions across a wide variety of play styles. There's been some discussion within the CSM on whether nullification on combat ships is a good or bad thing. This...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2017.02.01 14:34:20
|
4. Under-developed feature useful to miners & haulers - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I've waved the concept at CCP. (as it's about 8pm their time, no response, as you might expect ;) ) as it seems reasonable. (I can see a couple of possible issues. Like setting it to monitor a bay, then changing to a ship without it. Or the int...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.11.02 20:05:58
|
5. Sticky:[Focus Group] Contracts in Citadels - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Felix Judge wrote: Amarisen Gream wrote: Just an idea [...] make it so couriers don't need to dock to deliver. Just be tethered [...] or within tethering range. Seems a handy solution. Thus docking rights are no longer an issue. Could a...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.08.09 19:27:16
|
6. Citadel Module Hanger - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
I've flagged the concept to the appropriate Team. I _suspect_ it's not technically viable at this time (with how the inventory system works). But you never know.
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.08.03 13:09:10
|
7. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Tipa Riot wrote: Who's brilliant idea was it to make the blueprint for a Zeugma worthless and the built a loss? Uh, The players who decide it's not worth buying at a price which would make it buildable at a profit?
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.07.24 17:38:16
|
8. Sticky:[Focus Group] Contracts in Citadels - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Rivr Luzade wrote: Out of curiosity: When it comes to docking rights removal after someone accepted a courier contract, why simply not allow the citadel owner to remove the contract taker from a docking/service access list or not allow the take...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.07.12 12:04:27
|
9. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: For anyone who missed it, there was a brief comment on Fleet Boosting changes by CCP Larakin on the o7 show. The even shorter summary is that they were described as a "Buffing smart-bomb" with a huge radius (I would a...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.27 21:10:36
|
10. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: Steve Ronuken wrote: Nothing new to share yet. They haven't (as far as we've been told. Or not, in this case) started working on it. But it's often the case they'll kick it around internally, before bringing a clos...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.23 12:06:38
|
11. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Cade Windstalker wrote: Steve, any news or new information? Heck, do you think this thread has been useful at all so far? Any plans to do more threads like this for future features head of any CCP announcement? Nothing new to share yet. ...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.22 23:28:04
|
12. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Asveron Durr wrote: Honestly "off" Grid boosting needs to be rid of. What I am wondering is why not just make a command ship the only type that can use warefare links, when turned on they create like a bubble effect outward from the ship. Ran...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.13 00:04:18
|
13. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
tbh, I'd expect the boosting positions to go away. It's a level of 'complexity' that adds nothing to the game, if it's all range based. (except, possibly, the skill based boost, rather than the module based)
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.12 18:16:48
|
14. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Act-Mack PVT wrote: Are they special? Why is the CSM representing such a change when most people on the CSM are not fleet commanders and mostly industrialists and wormhole crabs. They shouldn't be allowed to represent something that is such a r...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.11 16:35:24
|
15. On grid boosters - Discussion Topic - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
First off, I want to give the disclaimer that CCP haven't asked me to do this. So no promises on when or if anything would be delivered. That out of the way: CCP will (probably) be working on boosts from links in the short to medium term future. ...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.11 13:19:58
|
16. Utilize Starter Corp's corp fittings window to provide fitting a... - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Ideas like this have been floating around for a fair time (including this exact idea). In general, I'm in favour of teaching by example. Providing a few 'decent' fits to people. I would, however, not put them in as part of the starter corps. Some...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.11 13:13:32
|
17. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Jeremiah Saken wrote: I've finally equip zeugma on my tengu - 155 cohrence while T2 data - 120c, T2 archeo - 115c. Bug or intentional? Are your skills for hacking and archaeology the same?
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.06.08 18:37:43
|
18. Faster server ticks for non-space features - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
ThePiachu Avar wrote: I think during Fanfest one of the developers mentioned that they were thinking about increasing the server tick speed with the new hardware, but that it would fundamentally change a few key aspect of how things work in EVE...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.05.16 14:10:11
|
19. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Noene Drops wrote: The idea sounds good, however there's one popular use case for hacking skills: having Archaeology V but Hacking IV. Of course ghost sites encourage training Hacking to V too, but is there any chance of "T2" version of these m...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.04.25 12:04:22
|
20. Mutli-Use Analyzers Feedback Thread - in Player Features and Ideas Discussion [original thread]
Dr Zemph wrote: Why not a scriptable analyzer instead? Something like the current sensor booster where you have one module that could hack both moderately well, or you can script it to hack either a data or a relic can really well. I like the...
- by Steve Ronuken - at 2016.04.25 12:00:28
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |