Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 12 post(s) |
Jordan Musgrat
H A V O C Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 01:57:00 -
[91]
Originally by: xttz
Greyscale: That was a whole lot of words to say very little. If you're trying to advertise null-sec, you'd do well to provide hard figures rather than just being figurative. Black Ops BS sounded good on paper but took 4 patches to be of any use. Adjusting HICs + dictors to curb titans and lowsec supercaps sounded fantastic, but resulted in rendering all motherships virtually useless. Hell even cynojammers sounded like great strategic objectives on paper, and we all know how they turned out. Publish the details now and let the community get the issues ironed out early. Because it's not like CCP really have the best track record at seeing the big picture.
He's got it right. CCP, so often you tell us you're "fixing this, fixing that," and we say "great," but then you wait till a month before, when you've basically got everything finalized, to tell us the details. This blog shows that you definitely have an idea on where sov and gameplay needs to go, but you'd do well to learn from the past and give us as much information as you can now, rather than later. Please, work with us on this. Some people here understand the game as well as you do, and nothing but good will come of having their opinion. -----------
Primary is family values, secondary is 0.0... |
Freidrich Nietchize
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:21:00 -
[92]
Well you've posted a nice pretty blog about all your intentions. Isn't that special. I haven't played this game long but I've played it long enough to know that all of your planning usually ends up being a bit detached from reality. How long did it take T3 ships to get anywhere near where CCP 'planned' them to be? Hell, are they even there now?
I know you guys are really trying, and I really hope you guys have have polished this great new expansion before you release it. Cause we all know how forgiving the paying customer is when you promise something in November of '09 and don't actually deliver it until August of '10.
Don't build us up and then deliver a flaming bag of sh*t. I won't care, I'll be in carebear land. But you're absolutely right about the fact that a lot of people would like to move into nullsec if you gave them the proper incentive(s). If you promise us change and then only do it half way (or you slaughter the existing nullsec corps) you're going to have a lot of disappointed (and angry) players.
And even worse, you know these ambiguous blogs get the playerbase thinking crazy ideas about what you might mean. And you know you can't deliver on those inflated ideas. ================================================ 00:59:14 Notify The Guardian Veteran is too far away, you need to be within 48400.0 meters of it but are actually 57737.3598289 meters away.
WHAT?! |
Ratnose Banker
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:25:00 -
[93]
Well since so few people live in 0.0 why not concentrate on your main player base and give us more quests, nice ship and pirate agents in high security so we have more things to do!!
|
Etien Aldragoran
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:28:00 -
[94]
Exponential fees to claim Sov is the stupidest thing ever.
|
SlipperedGuppy
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:31:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Ratnose Banker Well since so few people live in 0.0 why not concentrate on your main player base and give us more quests, nice ship and pirate agents in high security so we have more things to do!!
Mmm, depends on how you interpret it, but you could look at this as essentially giving players the ability to "extend empire space" by making it safe for the carebears, defending it against attack (with those defenses he's hinting at? + trusty pilots of course) and infinitely richer than empire ever will be. So there really will be a flow of players growing up from empire and moving out into 0.0, although that term won't exactly apply anymore will it now?
Wonder what the defenses would be... hmmm, you know the ability to build a concord like fleet to auto defend space would be interesting (at I'm sure what would be a respectable cost for the purchase of the AI pilot's services), but I doubt it honestly. More likely some kind of emplacement or turrets.
*shrugs* lets wait till it's out on singularity and find out.
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:44:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Scouty McScoutersen on 15/09/2009 02:44:56 It seems like there's two contradictory goals: trying to get more people to come to 0.0, and bringing a breath of fresh air to space holding and pvp.
I'm all for 0.0 becoming more of a pvp paradise, but making sov more volatile would make 0.0 a lot riskier than it is already since ratters will have less assurance of happily carebearing away in sov3 fortress regions, and people in empire would be hesitant to come down to 0.0 where their assets could disappear into a hostile station - why bother doing all that when you can just run missions and mine in empire for a lot less risk?
In order to give incentive for people to come down to 0.0 and not having the opposite effect (ie people running from 0.0 back to empire because its become easier to be griefed), you need to significantly buff 0.0 isk generation for individuals in comparison to empire.
|
Washell Olivaw
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:47:00 -
[97]
Edited by: Washell Olivaw on 15/09/2009 02:47:16
Originally by: teji
Originally by: Jason Edwards The funny thing is that in the new system. There will be a consistent like 40% tax or higher to pay for the military side using carebears. Which I think is great. Afterall most of the big countries IRL have like 50% tax.
If there is 50% tax rates for 0.0 it's all the more reason to mission on an OOC alt in empire. That would be hilarious to destroy even further 0.0 ratting. Also 50% tax IRL lol. Canada?
Do the math sometimes, federal/state/local/VAT/Gas/etc. They hide it well that you pay so much.
In regards to EVE: too high tax -> hi-sec alt -> no alliance income. 2 options:
Alliance can't afford to defend space, area gets conquered, new rulers impose lower tax. or Alliance sees no income, alliance lowers tax so that even after tax, people have a better income than hi-sec.
Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
|
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:50:00 -
[98]
Dont make Eve gay ccp. Think of the sov map after. So many small alliances everywhere will make it so colourful and dotty. That it will be a big long rainbow. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded. |
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:52:00 -
[99]
Originally by: Washell Olivaw
In regards to EVE: too high tax -> hi-sec alt -> no alliance income. 2 options:
Alliance can't afford to defend space, area gets conquered, new rulers impose lower tax. or Alliance sees no income, alliance lowers tax so that even after tax, people have a better income than hi-sec.
Basically this. Like I said in my post above, it all comes down to isk. Most individuals aren't thinking in terms of sov and grand political crap, they're thinking about their own k:d ratios or wallet or what have you.
If you want industrialists, miners, ratters, missioners, assorted carebears to come down from empire, isk is what they care about.
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
|
Chiralos
Epitoth Guard
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 02:57:00 -
[100]
Good post. Above all, I like the focus on making 0.0 not just more populated, but more varied in strategies. This will be very hard to make work. Promoting "emergence" is great, but the challenge and danger is avoiding the emergence of just 1 or 2 simple, stable strategies that are not very much fun.
Amarr Victor. |
|
Corporal Smackaho
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:04:00 -
[101]
I honestly never thought I would see the day that CCP would finally do something to break up the large alliances "New Rome" complex where they think they have to own every system.
And I still reserve my opinion to whether or not that will happen, I just hope they find a way to keep things from slowly going back to what we have now, a "good old boys network" or multiple of them rather, where small corps and alliances end up paying rent to the landlords of the universe.
I got my fingers crossed though, keeping huge alliances in check so that the rest of the people paying subscription fees can also experience nullsec is only right afterall, and now they can finally add tons of new systems without it just becoming the new playground of the same huge alliances who already own everything.
<3 CCP
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:07:00 -
[102]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
OR you could just nerf empire ISK generation a whole bunch. I like my idea much better. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Scouty McScoutersen
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:08:00 -
[103]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
OR you could just nerf empire ISK generation a whole bunch. I like my idea much better.
that works too, and would be less inflationary. but it would cause a lot of people in empire to unsubscribe and I think CCP wouldn't want that
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:21:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
OR you could just nerf empire ISK generation a whole bunch. I like my idea much better.
that works too, and would be less inflationary. but it would cause a lot of people in empire to unsubscribe and I think CCP wouldn't want that
Very true.
What I'm also really interested/concerned with is how the upcoming sov changes will affect botting etc. *tinfoilhattery* Is this a grand scheme by CCP to up their PCU numbers? LOL?
Imagine if macros/bots didn't exist in Eve. What would the price of stuff be? What about POS fuel? Capship fuel? I think it would be amazing to see what the game would be like when driven 100% by player action instead of supplemented by bots for a lot of the raw material supply. -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
De Guantanamo
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:30:00 -
[105]
First page. For real
|
Prometheus09
I.M.M Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:32:00 -
[106]
One thing tha hasnt being mentioned is how DUST is going intergrate into this new system. From what has being realeased so far on DUST a lot of got the idea that SOV was going to based on plantary control, but this system seems to go against that idea.
|
AF 447
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:32:00 -
[107]
My first language isn't English so it take hard time to understand clearly what this blog says...... Still it sounds good where this game its going, keep it up!
|
Kile Kitmoore
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:57:00 -
[108]
Really nice write-up but PLEASE the next blog HAS to start giving the details. These details should be what is coming in the Winter Expansion and not pie-in-the-ski fairytale fantasies of a possible future, the devil's in the details.
At this point you should be open for suggestions and prepare for a much needed heated debate, this can not happen until you release game mechanic details. DEVs need to detach themselves a bit to functions they planned which are not widely accepted. I have seen way to many MMO's fall into this trap where the DEV's are married to ideas or functions and absolutely refuse to listen to input, don't fall into this trap. You would think after the SOE NGE debacle the industry would have learned, to no surprise they have not.
Give those details, collect user feedback and test this expansion extensively. This has the potential to really blossom into something special or utterly blow-up into nightmare proportions where your business is hurt.
Good luck!
|
Yohanes Flame
Interstellar eXodus BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:08:00 -
[109]
Dev's are so ignorant to the workings and game play of nullsec in general. There are many alliances/corps that operate without any moons or sov. Which almost negates the entire argument. ____________________________ Point Zero Corp
|
Aethrwolf
Caldari Home for Wayward Gamers
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:09:00 -
[110]
Very cool to see the "why".. can we please start getting some information on the "how"?
I know you guys are still in development, but some details for us to "discuss" would be really nice. Just put the big "subject to change" disclaimer up so those of us who actually understand what that means can laugh at those who dont. At this oint you probably have your plans at least firmly set, but firm does not mean immovable and feedback is always a good thing.
btw.. when will we start to see this stuff on the test server? I would actually have a reason to get on it then. Absolutely everything is subjective. |
|
Atraxerxes
Caldari 22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit Vertigo Coalition
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:10:00 -
[111]
I can only hope that when they say they will make moon minerals less of a cash cow they are talking about the R64 minerals and not the R8 minerals.
I'd hate to think that I could sell my silicates for even less then I do now.
Would love to see some sort of random moon mineral respawn or just increase the number of moons with better mins. If the player base keeps going up T2 is only going to get more expensive and I'm sure every R64 moon is being plundered as I write this.
AX
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:11:00 -
[112]
Originally by: CCP Fallout CCP Greyscale has a new blog. One word: nullsec. Read. Discuss. You're welcome.
Excellent blog. Dominion is shaping up to be the best expansion ever IMO. This will pretty much recreate the game for people like me.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:17:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
OR you could just nerf empire ISK generation a whole bunch. I like my idea much better.
When will the POD pilots start contributing their fair share to empire tax revenues?
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:22:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Atraxerxes I can only hope that when they say they will make moon minerals less of a cash cow they are talking about the R64 minerals and not the R8 minerals.
I'd hate to think that I could sell my silicates for even less then I do now.
Would love to see some sort of random moon mineral respawn or just increase the number of moons with better mins. If the player base keeps going up T2 is only going to get more expensive and I'm sure every R64 moon is being plundered as I write this.
AX
Possible alternatives: Exploration sites with moongoo Hauler spawns add moongoo to the drop tables T2 production changed so that it doesn't rely so heavy on Dysp/Prom All of the above
|
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:24:00 -
[115]
Very interesting blog. It's nice to hear some of the reasoning that's going on for changes, though by looking at some of what was planned, the intentions were more or less clear (as are the problems in 0.0).
Attacking moon income is sensible as well, though I'm pleasantly surprised.
There are two immediate issues/concerns that come to mind from this blog, and I hope you will comment further on them:
1) If you split social groups, such as with alt alliances, then you will quickly (very quickly in some cases) run into the limitations of the standings system/list.
If you are intending to populate 0.0, what are you doing to improve the representation of relationships between alliance bodies?
2) The current, main tactic for reliably disrupting "normal" player-driven isk-making activies in 0.0 alliance space is to toss a handful of cloaking ships into a system and make it impossible to use it, or to extract the attackers. Your new 0.0 system will make the uncounterable cloak an even more problematic hole in the EVE system.
What measures do you plan to take (in Dominion--this cannot wait) to address detection and decloaking of ships--either at the sov-holder, system level, or on ships?
Thanks for the "why" blog--please give us more of these as you move forward.
--Krum
--Krum |
Manu Hermanus
FaDoyToy
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:39:00 -
[116]
Edited by: Manu Hermanus on 15/09/2009 04:42:07 sounds like this aligns with my views on eve very well.
looking forward to the "fixes"
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Scouty McScoutersen
Bottom line: you want more people in 0.0, buff 0.0 isk making significantly in comparison to empire
OR you could just nerf empire ISK generation a whole bunch. I like my idea much better.
then people just make less isk in general. the current 0.0 money making methods are kinda outside of running a moon mining operation. people would end up mining veld in 0.0 and crashing trit prices, as once you get past a ratter or two that is all that (veldspar) is left in most systems.
you can't have 1000s of players mining veld, think of Chribba!!!!
|
Jack Gilligan
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:41:00 -
[117]
Originally by: Evelgrivion
Quote: A reduction in the value of moon minerals
How is this going to be achieved? Is it tied to the resource density improvements mentioned in the blog?
The only way to do that with any certainty is to increase the supply. Which is long overdue, the number of high end moons has been static in this game for some time, and was set LONG before we reached 300K players.
I would imagine that the intent is to make alchemy replace high end moons much as invention has supplanted T2 BPO's. The moons won't be taken out of the game, but there will be a viable competitor that will put boundaries on their monopoly.
Really that's what I thought they were going to do when they introduced alchemy. It clearly failed, and probably not by accident, as the blog states, they didn't know about the ferrogel dupe exploit at the time they rolled it out.
And, more supply means cheaper T2 mods and ships. For someone who likes to fly and die in them, that's good news.
|
Darthewok
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:44:00 -
[118]
incredibly awesome. sounds like it could open up EVE in so many different ways - military/economic/player experience. no more stagnation and finite formulaic strategies, onward with infinite emergence. all the best with the work on the expansion!
|
Jack Gilligan
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:47:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Jimer Lins I sense a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth from high-end moon holders in the future.
This has needed nerfing for over a year.
Most of the wars of the last year have been fought over R64's and R32's.
Also, do alliances of thousands that have maybe 1-200 actual actives in any given time zone really NEED 100 solar systems? They shouldn't need that many. One system in Empire can support that many mission runners, etc. 0.0 systems need to be able to provide income for a higher density of population, which means more than shooting rats in the belts.
If they do this right, it should be designed to be effect neutral, as in, you will have less space, but you will get far more out of it than you do now, meaning that you really wouldn't WANT 100 solar systems.
If they do this poorly it means a lot of 0.0 players quitting EVE. There really isn't any room for mistakes on this one...
|
FlameGlow
Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 04:53:00 -
[120]
no pictures is fail _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |