|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
   |
Posted - 2009.05.23 14:03:00 -
[1]
Wooooot another Akita rant. I love it when this happens 
Of course lots of points mentioned are valid, no doubt about this.
With factional warfare I was quite strongly voiced when I saw it first on the test-server and made several posts that FW would fail - and it did.
With alchemy I wrote also several posts and suggestions. Alchemy in itself is not that a bad idea and the implementation is okay. But the numbers are not okay. The numbers are ALL based on pre-pos exploit where it was possible to create (expensive) things just out of nowhere. After they discovered and uprooted this pos-exploit they should have adjusted the alchemy numbers (very very easy to do!!) but they completely ignored it despite several posts.
T3 resources ... are fail. They work more or less similar to moon materials with the big big exception that you actively need to harvest the t3 resources. Moon materials are just gathered by anchoring a moon harvester, waiting a week and then collecting the stuff from the full silos. T2 would absolutely crash if you would need actively gather the materials like you need to do with T3. Besides ... introducing lots of new isk sources (via npc buy orders) is bad bad baaaaaad! Didn't tell your economist about mmo-inflation being a really ugly thing (besides, where is he?).
People in Eve lust for power. Territory is power. Isk is power. Factional warfare ranks are not power. Wormholes are not power.
If you could use factional warfare for something 'useful' related to the rest of the Eve universe and not just being some sort of mini-game within Eve, then you would make faction warfare interesting and thriving.
Wormholes became a bit more useful recently, there are big roids in there which yield lots of good profit. But that is not good enough. And get rid of those stupid npc buy orders! If you can make wormholes only working with artificial isk-injections by npc then you seriously need to work on the whole concept of wormholes!!
It should be able to utilize wormholes more. Building up a secret fleet to unleash some suprise attacks. Wormhole stabilizing modules so that you can use wormholes better (of course they need to come with a price). Mapping of wormhole systems and connections. Trading wormhole entrances via contracts. And and and
Please CCP ... for the sake of Eve.
Please fix and improve existing things first before you start working on new things! Please no expansions with new things before existing features aren't improved.
We do not need new stuff. You do not need new stuff. Eve is so aweeeeesome already!! Your PR doesn't need new stuff either (or if they claim they need, then fire them because of incompetency and get a better PR staff), there is so much potential in Eve. But if you do not start working on utilizing this potential you will starve Eve sooner or later.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 15:09:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: CommmanderInChief
I think T3 'could' be great...
No, they can't.
Either T3 would be hugely overpowered (no one wants that, no one wants the I-win ship), or they have few special roles.
But what roles should that be? All roles are already taken by the T2 ships.
Unless CCP changes the whole concept of T3 ships and gives them some special ROLES and not just some damage bonus or stuff that the other ships can do also (just to a bit lesser degree), T3 will be useless.
The whole concept of 'we make a versatile shipclass that can be customized to fill in one of the existing roles of choice but is hugely more expensive than those ships which already are spezialised for those roles' is just stupid and makes no sense at all.
New roles, that would help. Three or four new roles (yes, that is major work) which can be chosed for the T3 ships only, that would work.
But then ... why spending that big amount of design and development time for a thing which is not necessary while the existing game lacks a lot of stuff at every part you look at? Makes no sense.
And CCP cannot really think that they could fish in tons of new players with RP about new stuff while we have critical bugs in Eve every so often? I am quite sure that the bugs resulting from Apocrypha 1.2 and onwards chased away a many new players. Another reason not to throw in new things into Eve while there is still so much fixing and improvement to do.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 16:04:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: CommmanderInChief
I think T3 'could' be great...
No, they can't. Either T3 would be hugely overpowered (no one wants that, no one wants the I-win ship), or they have few special roles.[...]
Not true. Consider leaving everything about T3 (stats-wise) exactly the way they are now (maybe slightly toned down on some of the more "useful" configurations). Would the "bad" T3 ship configs cost around 80 to 100 mil ISK, and the "good" T3 ship configs cost around 150 to 200 mil ISK, they wouldn't be "hugely overpowered", and they wouldn't "totally suck" either.
The only thing about T3 that "sucks" right now is the pricetag, and it's where it is almost exclusively because CCP failed to provide the adequate drop/harvest/build rates needed.
I disagree.
If you need to price down the T3 that much, then the T2 ships become obsolete. No one wants that. Besides then those people who gather the t3 resources will scream out and just stop gathering because they lose all profit.
If the 'good' T3 ship is only 10% or 20% better than the T2 ship then no one will pay that much more isk. If you make the T3 much stronger then you already overpower it.
No, the T3 ship needs unique roles. The interdiction nullifier subsystem for example is a step into that direction. What is necessary are more such unique subsystems (they need to be useful of course too). Just as a fancy example: a module/subsystem which can act as remote heat-sink so that people in fleet can overheat their modules and the t3 ship actively nullifies the heat generated on the other ships to a certain degree.
More unique roles! People will pay the price for that. Just lowering the price to get the t3 ship in order with current t2 ships is boringly mindless and really lacks any vision.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 18:40:00 -
[4]
First of all, thanks Akita and others for the good discussion going on. I hope that at also some people at CCP are reading this and use it as some additional input to their thoughts.
Originally by: Akita T
And even if T2 ships would become obsolete... what's the problem with that ?
The problem with that is that you will end up T3 replacing T2 and the different 'good' subsystem combinatons will emulate the different T2 ship classes.
You will gain nothing from that. You just need to spend tons of developer time to build a second version of something that already exists in game and is balanced pretty well.
This makes no sense at all.
As I said, it would be different if those T3 ships would have some unique features, if they would introduce new roles. Something which the t2 ships did compared to the t1 ships.
Just emulating the existing t2 ships, melt them into a single hull with various subsystems and rename them to t3 is pretty pointless. They need unqiue roles!
All the price changes wouldn't change the underlying flaw. The whole concept of t3 (as currently implemented) is flawed and really need to be thought about. And no, isk is not the big problem - it is just a symptom.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 21:30:00 -
[5]
Originally by: OffBeaT
the OP has a real good point why should missions be the highest bang for your buck vs mostly anything Elise..
Well, you see ... you say mission running gives you the highest bang for your buck, but that is completely wrong.
It gives you some isk, true. But now what about over activities?
With trading you could make ten times the isk with only 1/10 of invested time.
Harvesting high end moons gives 400+ mil each day, just by running the harvester at one moon. If you have a secured area of space then it is absolutely free isk in huge amounts, doing nothing.
Invention and building only needs few minutes and gives you - if done properly - big amounts of money also.
There are many BIGGER bangs in Eve than level 4 missions. Level 4 missions actually are paying pretty poor compared to all the possible activities in Eve and they are really large time sinks.
Funny to see how this thread went from an interesting analysis of the lose charges in Eve to level 4 mission bashing. Or was that the primary intent of the op from beginning on anyway?
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.24 05:09:00 -
[6]
Akita, you are focussing far to much on level 4 mission running as a metric for isk income.
You say you easily earn 100 mil isk in 12 hours there. That is really a joke and very pityful income for all the work you need to do.
You can earn billions with station trading, investing just a few minutes daily (rag to riches as example). Why don't you lose a word about this?
You can earn billions weekly with inventing and manufacturing. Again, also only a few minutes daily necessary.
You can earn billions weekly with moon reactions. All you need to do is to refuel the pos every 2 weeks and empty the silos every few days.
You can earn billions daily with high end moon harvesting (yes, yes risky it sounds? not if you have secure space!).
Spamming officer spawns in 0.0 (0.0 is not that risk if you have some intel channels open and just an eye on local). Some 0.0 systems are really bugged and the chance of an officer spawn is hugely increased. I call that an exploit but obviously CCP doesn't care about that. I know people who hunts down officers daily with little effort and have officer equipment which lasts for a year and longer at current sell rates.
Compared to all these activities which at worst require 1 hour time each day the 12-hours-level4-spamming-for-100mil is a really slow and cumbersome way to earn isk. It needs a lot of effort and payment is bad.
Akita, your sole focussing on level4 missions as metric for income is faulty. There are better ways to earn isk in Eve, there are worse ways. Level 4 missions are neither a lower bound nor are they a upper bound.
Yes, as I said already here and in other threads: many things in Eve needs improvements. Some of the improvements are absolutely easy that it would only need a couple of hours for a dedicated team (adjusting alchemy for example), other improvements needs more time but the time needed is nothing compared to what CCP currently invests (or invested) to introduce new features that no one needs right now.
The current potential of Eve is just going waste.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.27 14:10:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Akita T
... describing a different reward system for missions ...
Far to difficult.
Just introduce dynamic agent qualities!
If lots of people are running missions for an agent, its quality will drop.
If few or no people are running missions for an agent, its quality will rise.
Remove -20/+20 caps on agent qualities.
Recalculate the agents qualities every downtime (or any other short enough interval).
Easy, simple and effective.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.05.31 14:57:00 -
[8]
The problem is not really that things didn't develop as expected or as hoped by CCP and their devs (you never know how new features will be liked).
The problem is that lots of people on the forums pointed exactly out that things will fail and they exactly described the reasons why they would fail a long time before release.
Still, it got released without any changes - and failed of course.
THAT is why some people say it was wasted time.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.06.02 07:35:00 -
[9]
Pricetag of t3 ships:
If you carefully analyse the t3-building chain then you see that only few items are really expensive and responsible for 80% of the costs. If you increase the availibilty of those items, the price of t3 ships will drop sharply. But then you reduce value of those items and people are even more reluctant to venture into wormholes if there is no profit - that is the whole problem with t3! And that is why it fails, and will continue to fail. And people (me included) told that all over even before wormholes were released.
On of the biggest waste time for developers I see is that they start doing something which sounds great, get the design up and all - but they never ask or listen to player input in that early stage. They listen and adjust minor stuff and tweak little things maybe late, pretty close to release. But that is not good enough.
Of course it is CCP's game and they can develop as much as they want. But there are lots of really experienced players here with a better insight into Eve than maybe even the devs - why let this great potential go to waste?
If player would be asked in the early design stage, much waste time could be prevented!
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.06.05 06:05:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Akita T
what exactly do they do for mining itself, which is not completely off the initial balance ? NOTHING !
Rorqual, Orca, gravimetric sites.
Originally by: Akita T
(good luck even GETTING in a place with enough Ark, you'd be lucky if you have access to Crok)
...And that outside of deep alliance-controlled 0.0 space, very few people bother mining ?
Did you have a look at wormhole gravimetric sites? Even the class1 wormholes contain HUGE amounts ore, and also high end ores. A single site worth 250+ mil with just a few very big roids (easy to mine therefore) is not the exception but normal there. And you have many grav sites there.
*leans back and watches the high end minerals dropping even more in price* |
|
|
|
|
| |
|