Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 14:21:00 -
[661]
1.) Sovereignty - make it somehow like FW, but with a constant need to do those "complexes" or whatever it will be. Just replace ratting with this and you won't have any additional work for those that really want to own the space. Right now it's about fueling POSes and apart from that leaving the space abandoned... Space should be owned by those who USE it not by those who fuel some POSes and have a big cap fleet to defend them
2.) Local - just remove it, add cloaked ships to the scanner (e.g., "something cloaked") and give a means to scan down cloaked ships
3.) Aggression timers for docking/jumping - these should be based on the ship size; the fact that a capital ship only has to wait one minute to dock after aggressing only necessitates blobbing - Success=Achievements/Expectations
|
Beverly Sparks
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 14:36:00 -
[662]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: Xelios So I think we've got enough top 3's now, time for discussion threads?
Aye.
By the end of the day
I can't believe he is still reading. I know I stopped around page 11.
|
Hurricane Carter
0ccam's Razor Nexus-Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 14:55:00 -
[663]
1) Minmatar Cap ships (Naglfar and Nidhoggur could use a buff in particular, Hel and Ragnarok seem fine)
2) Minmatar Guns, especially Battleship sized ones. (buff)
3) Caldari's "SOLO-Ability" and their generally usefull(read: used) ships. not a lot of caldari ships are worth using unlike for instance Minmatar ships (cruiser & below) and gallente or amarr (any other race then caldari that is). Some way to make Caldari's more solo-viable would greatly help
|
Kimura Masahiko
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 15:31:00 -
[664]
Edited by: Kimura Masahiko on 22/04/2009 15:33:15 Edited by: Kimura Masahiko on 22/04/2009 15:31:58 1) Restore the Risk/Reward balance between Hi-sec, Low-sec and Null-sec: Currently 95% of people in lowsec are Pirates, Factional Warfare Players, and inexperienced players who are about to get ganked. There is zero reason to leave Hi-sec to make isk with L4 missions available to grind away at 23/7. Revitalise Low-sec by making it more rewarding, balancing out the constant risk of being ganked.
2) Give Assault Frigates a 4th Bonus: They are out of line with all other T2 ships, and in need of a boost. Try and come up with an effective fit for a Vengeance or Hawk, or hit another frigate in a tight orbit in a Wolf or Jag, without laughing/crying.
3) Fix Rockets: They are completely underpowered relative to the other close-range/high-damage weapon systems, with very high fitting requirements. On top of this, the explosion velocity makes it almost impossible to bring their puny dps to bear on frigate sized ships.
|
Seishi Maru
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 15:49:00 -
[665]
Come on Nozh .. i am F5 ing this forum like mad in antecipation for the discussion threads :) |
Wang Jing
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 15:52:00 -
[666]
Originally by: Seishi Maru Come on Nozh .. i am F5 ing this forum like mad in antecipation for the discussion threads :)
I wonder if Nozh is based in Iceland or US... we've got a long wait if hes on US time. |
Perry
Amarr The X-Trading Company RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 15:59:00 -
[667]
If we keep adding top3s we will wait forever ^^ |
DigitalCommunist
November Corporation
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 16:49:00 -
[668]
ALL HAIL THE PEOPLES DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF EVE
TOP 3
TOP 3
TOP 3
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 16:54:00 -
[669]
Should be top 4 or 5 given the number of popular issues.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
|
Wang Jing
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 17:10:00 -
[670]
Brace for epic rage threads when whatever important issue is completely ignored.
(I know mine will be ) |
|
Clueless Alt
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 17:26:00 -
[671]
Originally by: Seishi Maru Come on Nozh .. i am F5 ing this forum like mad in antecipation for the discussion threads :)
|
Frater Sen
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 17:41:00 -
[672]
I have to write a bit more about low sec. My experience with servers, where Players vs. Players (speak: everybody vs. everybody) was enabled, without any safe zones to level/grind some money, exactly those servers were after a short time empty. Daoc for example: Starting with 5K players trying to log in and play every evening - ending after 3 months with 300 up to 600 players at weekends during peak times... and a quit chunk of those players were buffbots on second accounts. I had a good time, because I was in an organised guild wich leveled fast and farmed all the "carebears" on their favourite farming spots. Hmm, maybe it had been a lot wiser not to beat up every low level for giggles... after a short time, players left the server fast. Low sec isnt so far away from exactly this situation and I donĘt think, that the hope of some PKs will be satisfied. To speak bluntly: Moving Agents to low sec, reducing rewards and loyality points will not get pirates more victims to kill. Players will stay in high sec, because they are tired of killed by random PKs. The fun for the PK is the loss of ISK and countless hours of farming for somebody else. There are players behind the toon and a lot of those donĘt enjoy to be a victim and they dont think its fun to loose their ship and implants. The problem with missioning in low sec is: PKs can choose a fight with PvP fitted ships against PvE players with pve fitted ships. That isnt a fight with a realistic win chance for the pve player, never. |
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 17:52:00 -
[673]
1. minmatar capitals. 2. ECM and ECCM (the entire mechanic needs revamping) 3. risk / reward of lvl 4 missions in highsec |
Ral K'Daro
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 17:54:00 -
[674]
1. ECM issues - falcon 'nerf' did not fix 2. minmatar capitals - dozens of issues 3. risk / reward in highsec, lowsec, and nullsec. adding rat bs to lowsec was a good addition, but money-making in highsec is just as profitable and infinitely more safe. |
Verloc Nostromo
Black Mesa
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 18:00:00 -
[675]
1: Citadel Torps, i would love to be able to hit a target before its already dead or actually do damage when i do hit anything moving.
2: Blasters, yea i think we all know whats wrong there.
3: Destroyers, make em useful.
|
Daemonspirit
Redhawk Tribal Trust
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 18:27:00 -
[676]
Edited by: Daemonspirit on 22/04/2009 18:28:05 I would like to see more ways into :
1. 0.0 - more NPC space. Less Drone space? Sleeper spawned 0.0 space that can't be claimed?
2. Industrial/mining/Research/Invention encouragement to Low-Sec: - (If there is more reason to go there, and rewards are hi-enough, Industrialists/researchers/inventors will go - taking PVP wings with them... Increasing low-sec population, and spreading out players - Spreading out players decreases risk for those averse to risk, w/o REMOVING risk...)
3. OVERHAUL CORP/POS MECHANICS - the interface sux!:
Comments:
(T-1 loot removed from missions?, Decrease Hi-end minerals from Reprocessing? ((IE - TWEAK, NOT SLEDGEHAMMER!)), Increase % bonus for research/invention/Manufacturing in Low-sec, because we know all those station managers know Stations are easier to control when the population is employed...
(If there is more reason to go there, and rewards are hi-enough, Industrialists/researchers/inventors will go - taking PVP wings with them... Increasing low-sec population, and spreading out players - Spreading out players decreases risk for those averse to risk, w/o REMOVING risk...)
BONUS IDEA (Blatently plagerized from Ruze!):
Low Sec Missions:
Increase % rewards from LP/Standings/isk - Change missions from "warp in - static fight in one area" to "Warp to site, kill 3-5 enemies (sleeper AI?), then warp to another area, kill 3-5 enemies, so that Mission Runners aren't tied to one area (i.e. - so easy to scan down and kill)
tl;dr - move missioners around systems so that risk of running lvl 4's in low-sec does not outweigh any possible gains.
Thanks for listening... ;)
|
Liang Nuren
No Salvation PuPPet MasTers
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 18:31:00 -
[677]
Originally by: CCP Nozh
Originally by: Xelios So I think we've got enough top 3's now, time for discussion threads?
Aye.
By the end of the day
Oh N0zh!! The end is nigh! The end is nigh! Fantastic news.... I'll get the arguments and flame suits out. :)
-Liang |
Onnen Mentar
Murientor Tribe
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 19:08:00 -
[678]
Not so much an imbalance top 3 as a "things that annoy me the most in eve" top 3. Hope it's useful anyway.
1) ships unable to fulfill their main role or with major oddities (hyena, dramiel and many others..); frankly instead of asking for a top 3 it would be very useful to go through all the ship classes and ask people's opinions on a ship class by ship class basis, hopefully once and for all identifying ships with major oddities and banning those from the game once and for all, giving everyone more viable options.
2) nonsense game mechanics/modules
3) armor tanks/shield tanks (passive tanks/active tanks); at the very least reduce cpu requirements of remote shield transporters (adjust minmatar/caldari logistics cpu in response of course) |
Murashu
Agony's End
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 19:16:00 -
[679]
Originally by: Beverly Sparks I can't believe he is still reading. I know I stopped around page 11.
Hopefully this turns out better than the "we are listening, we just don't agree" method they used on the SB's. |
Vertical Axis
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 20:04:00 -
[680]
1. minmatar capitals 2. pos interface (not a balancing issue, but more of a omgthisisawfulUI) 3. ecm
|
|
Vitrael
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 20:25:00 -
[681]
Edited by: Vitrael on 22/04/2009 20:29:35 1. ECM: Still insanely overpowered and a necessity to every gang, even with Falcons being heavily nerfed. Please change ECCM such that it makes you immune to ECM, I don't like fitting a dedicated module to counter an all-dominating Ewar type and still getting jammed all the time. Otherwise decrease ECM strength across the board. ECM drones need their strength drastically reduced as it seems they have become defacto insta-win in small engagements.
2. Large Projectiles: poor damage, poor range, generally outclassed at every distance by other weapons. Autocannons need a bit more optimal or dps and Artillery need more ammunition capacity (1400s = 10 shots of tremor/emp) and alpha or DPS. Otherwise, making it so that we can select damage types with ammunition without losing a huge portion of DPS would be nice. I don't think the "no cap need" presently makes them viable. Medium projectiles and small seem to do alright though.
3. Citadel Torpedos: extremely poor explosion velocity in siege limits usefulness, even carriers can "speed tank" Naglfars and Phoenixes by moving at over 20m/s. Need improved missile flight speed (if at the cost of flight time) and vastly improved explosion velocity or DRF.
Quote: 2) Rockets: They are simply broken.
If I had a #4 it would be to re-assess all missiles in general. Since the introduction of HAMs and Torpedos, rockets have been made to look silly. Very short range, very low DPS, generally not useful compared to standard missiles. It would be nice if they were a bit more like the new HAMs and Torps as a small counterpart rather than as a black sheep that no one fits (even on Maledictions). Assault launchers could use a pretty significant ROF buff as well. -----
|
David Caldera
Gallente Strix Armaments and Defence
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 20:36:00 -
[682]
[1] Highsec L4 missions: I understand everyone likes to do what they want, heck, I'm a mission-runner myself mainly, but it makes no sense that hourly ISK gain is so high and secure when running L4, compared to other activities. It is now no longer a matter of choice if you want to gain ISK; if you want a playerless secure "easy" and arguably best way to get it, L4 is the only way. This leads to many other activities in EVE not being practised by enough players, nearly making them obsolete. Low-sec as a general being the worst victim. I am not suggesting L4 needs to be nerfed, but it needs to get in line with the other activities when it comes to risk and reward.
[2] Blasterboats: The tracking needs to be looked at. Blasters are a bit underpowered now.
[3] Factional Warfare: Not enough reason to go PvP and suffer the Factional standing losses with the current rewards. David Caldera |
ChowMung
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 21:20:00 -
[683]
1) Nerf L4s. 2) Lowsec needs to be made somewhat attractive. 3) Blasters deserve a long-overdue buff.
|
Digital Anarchist
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 21:54:00 -
[684]
Blasterships could use a little love. ------------------------ This space for rent |
isdisco3
Reaper Industries Eternal Rapture
|
Posted - 2009.04.22 22:35:00 -
[685]
Edited by: isdisco3 on 22/04/2009 22:37:24 Well, I'm a glutton for punishment, so I counted the first 13 pages of this thread. I stopped there because its time to get beer, pizza, and watch hockey.
As a disclaimer, I grouped several complaints together. Complaints about "boost damps!" were included with "non-ECM ewar sucks!" and "webs are horribly nerfed." This is because I view them as part of the same problem. For the same reason, anything related to minmatar projectile turrets were included in one category, all issues relating to t2 ammo were in the same category, and all complaints about minmatar ships (which were by far the most common) are in one category. Here's all votes that I saw getting 15 or more votes in the first 13 pages.
1. minmatar projectiles (artilleries, autocannons, regardless of size - 102 2. minmatar ships (capitals, bs, recons, and so on) - 93 3. general re-balance of regions (complaints about risk / reward of highsec, lowsec, and 0.0, mostly missions) - 62 4. blasters - 61 5. t2 ammunition (typically short-range, but complaints were about it in general) - 57 6. rockets - 31 7. sov, pos, and the resulting 0.0 warfare - 27 8. non-ECM ewar (typically, boost it) - 27 9. ecm drones specifically - 20 10. types of tanking (passive vs armor vs shield vs hull) - 20 11. titans - 18 12. assault ships - 17 13. pos setup and logistics - 16
please quote this or whatever if you find it useful, i would not want the summary to get lost in the middle of page 23 (as it is now!). i tried to be fair in the summary, i'm sure some toes are being stepped on by grouping things together.
|
The Kan
Gallente The Circle
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 00:37:00 -
[686]
- Blasters. They rly need a bit more damage and some serious tracking boost.
- Supercaps. They are supposed to be "super" but they are not. A mothership dies too quickly, same goes for titan. Some sort of boost to tanking on motherships/titans should happen. armor repper/shield booster HP amount bonus maybe? also a armor/shield HP boost (+50% at least) for the price they cost, atm they are just a coffin.
- Railguns - they need more alpha. they are subpar
|
Tob Seayours
Minmatar Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 01:15:00 -
[687]
Edited by: Tob Seayours on 23/04/2009 01:20:38 *whistles innocently*
|
Handon Guild
The Glenn Quagmire Finishing School for Young Ladies
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 02:20:00 -
[688]
1 ECM / ECCM needs a revamp imo, ECM is still way to overpowered as it is now, it really ruin good fights when a falcon warp in and perma jam 3-4 targets -.- its not even funny. " the new patch did NOT fix it "
2 ......
3 Profit!
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 03:48:00 -
[689]
Originally by: Murashu
Originally by: Beverly Sparks I can't believe he is still reading. I know I stopped around page 11.
Hopefully this turns out better than the "we are listening, we just don't agree" method they used on the SB's.
Could go the way it did when I and several others said that the massive scripting nerf to sensor boosters and tracking computers would drastically affect minmatars role as snipers...
|
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2009.04.23 05:41:00 -
[690]
1. Rocket damage 2. Rocket explosion velocity 3. Hawk & Vengeance (Those two assault ships have lower damage bonus than the Kestrel (T1 frig) and Crow (interceptor)!)
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 47 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |