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 - 40 post(s) |
Endeavour Starfleet
834
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 09:56:00 -
[361] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:AMirrorDarkly wrote:Wow, this shifts War decs firmly back to the advantage of the aggressor, I expected some sort of rebalance in light of what's happend with Goons getting a taste of their own medicine but this seems like it's gone the other way again.... Shame The biggest issue was that being able to invite everyone and the kitchen sink to your war meant that hiring a merc became completely irrelevant. Hopefully limiting the options slightly will provide people with more incentives to hire mercs (but still let you throw a ton of money at allies).
Tell me soundwave have you even remotely considered that small corps will be harmed by this change the most? Now the pointless wardecs will start again when the wardec corp knows that small corps feel the pain of isk to bring in more allies.
And even better if you really want to drive them out of EVE split your forces into multiple corps.
This change returns wardecs into the griefing camp. And thus utterly makes the work CCP did on them pointless. |
Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 13:51:00 -
[362] - Quote
gah... deleted it cos only half got posted. I'm hating this forum system... |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
55
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 16:46:00 -
[363] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:People are *still* talking about how this benefits large alliances and completely ignoring 99.9% of EvE.
Can anyone exactly explain how? You realise you can go shoot them in nullsec, for free, all day every day right? You realise absolutely nothing in this change STOPS you from forming a large "coalition" to go and fight nullsec powerblocks, right?
Do you also realise the self same groups were wardeccing the Goons before the change, and paying a small 50-150mil a week to do it?
Given your answers to the above, do you really want a mechanic which is designed to be usable only in the case of a large alliance wardeccing you?
If people could take "goons" off their brains for 2seconds they'd see the change for what it is.
I'm coming to understand that none of you are able to do this. Pity.
Jade keeps telling us about his "mighty coalition of allies who have banded together" but still dodges basic questions about them, such as whether he has even spoken to the people pressing "ally all" in their Neocom. Someone who wants to "shoot goons for free" (his words) is not an ally fighting for his ideals.
We're talking about how it may benefits large alliances because thats where the potential issue is - the fact that the mechanic works for the vast majority of eve is good, so no complaints there. We're just discussing certain edge cases that could potentially allow abuse. The fact that we've already seen attempts to do this (and then a counter, and then CCP stepping in to remove the counter) suggests that hey, maybe the mechanic is something that needs a bit more fine tuning
All I see you doing is blithering on about how people are crying about goons, rather than anything constructive |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
72
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 16:51:00 -
[364] - Quote
The Bi-Weekly Attention Span Eh... I don't have a very clear opinion but seems wrong
Money For Nothing I can see how this can be a good change. As mentioned by Soundwave, 1000 people joining at no cost kinda defeats the whole purpose of the system.
You Can Bribe Me, But Not Too Much I like this change a lot. It only makes sense that if there's a clear cut minimum there should be a similar maximum, rather than one based on an algorithm.
Push the Button What about showing both kill/loss reports with color codes :(
About the Skill What the hell are you guys thinking? Is it your new company policy to stick one big thorn into every expansion? Allright, so the Reactive Armor Hardener is an "experimental" mod right? Which means, you don't know if you want to keep it in the game, and thus you released no blueprints for it. And yet, you're adding skills to be able to use it... A RANK 5!11!!1! Skill at that. Unless you plan on keeping that mod and thus introducing meta 0 variant, the relevant BPO and other meta versions of it, etc. etc. then it makes no sense to have to train any skills to use it. Am I missing something here?
Other than that, thanks for your time and continued hard work! |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc Exhale.
57
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 16:54:00 -
[365] - Quote
When you think about it, the 1.1 changes are laughably skewed in favour of the aggressor (compared to being stupidly skewed for the defender in 1.0, and stupidly skewed for the aggressor pre-inferno)
1) it costs 50m for a big alliance to dec a small corp, which is nothing. They also have a huge advantage in numbers. 2) it costs a small corp 500m to dec a big alliance. They're also at a huge disadvantage as far as numbers go. 3) the defending corp has to pay to get allies, with exponentially rising prices
1 + 3 = utterly ridiculous. A small corp decced by a huge alliance can't mount a defence by themselves, in order to try and get a reasonable counter/defence they have to pay a load of isk for allies.
If a small corp wants to dec a large alliance they have to pay a load of isk.
|
Antisocial Malkavian
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
123
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:12:00 -
[366] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Jypsie wrote:Selissa Shadoe wrote:From this thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=110428&p=12 , and I agree with it Quote:It should be free to call in allies until the number of "defender" players equals the number of "aggressor" players. Then it can escalate. That to me makes sense, then unless you're overwhelming your attacker, you can gather whoever you need to stand up to them. If you want silly numbers on your side, then you have to pay for it. Sounds much more fair. Thank you, Lallante, who made that suggestion in the other thread. This makes more sense CCP. The larger alliances already have an advantage in manpower and resources to bring into a fight. Artificially giving them even more advantages preventing defenders from getting Allies by a game induced tax is unnecessary. Once some sort of parity is approached, you can start applying fees to keep the kitchen sink from being thrown. Mercs will still be appealing, in their own niche. For example: A 10 man high-sec piracy corp decs a 30 man mining corp, demanding ransom or exploding Orcas. At this point the defender is already over the manpower headcount of the aggressor with an apparent 3:1 "advantage." Make them pay an exorbitant fee to bring in an ally. Reality knows that they need some combat pilots. This is where the Mercs come into play. They could be hired for less than the cost of bringing in Allies. Mercs would also be appealing to bring in an advantage once you have an approx. 1:1 headcount with your enemy for less than the cost of Allies. Sadly Soundwave is 100% committed to this large-alliance boosting change and its pretty much set in stone. No feedback on revising the plan has been considered as far as I can tell - and the CSM itself (those who were at the meeting) was ignored completely when they gave the thumbs down to this particular "fix". I strongly suspect we'll all be stuck with it for six months at least.
What precisely were you expecting from Goonwave http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
133
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:33:00 -
[367] - Quote
Niko Lorenzio wrote: About the Skill What the hell are you guys thinking? Is it your new company policy to stick one big thorn into every expansion? Allright, so the Reactive Armor Hardener is an "experimental" mod right? Which means, you don't know if you want to keep it in the game, and thus you released no blueprints for it. And yet, you're adding skills to be able to use it... A RANK 5!11!!1! Skill at that. Unless you plan on keeping that mod and thus introducing meta 0 variant, the relevant BPO and other meta versions of it, etc. etc. then it makes no sense to have to train any skills to use it. Am I missing something here?
Other than that, thanks for your time and continued hard work!
Deserves quoting. For emphasis. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Antisocial Malkavian
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
123
|
Posted - 2012.06.16 19:49:00 -
[368] - Quote
Actually I think this just gives a reason to stay in a NPC corp if youre gonna be in High sec. Till they make those deccable anyways http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
125
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 00:18:00 -
[369] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP? Self-appointed forums hallway monitor |
Antisocial Malkavian
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
124
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 02:03:00 -
[370] - Quote
Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP?
yea the changes in the blog. I like how ppl try to pretend they arent related lol
Bet you thought T20 was just another dev and those charges were trumped up too lol http://gizmodo.com/5913381/season-your-food-with-salt-from-real-human-tears
you will be harvested |
|
Amarrius Ibn Pontificus
Liberty Trident L I B E R T Y
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 13:13:00 -
[371] - Quote
Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP?
As your leader would say: You're not a valid subscriber, you're a NPC alt. The opinions of NPC alts don't count for anything
So come back as your main, ask that again and maybe you'll get an answer. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
509
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 14:08:00 -
[372] - Quote
Antisocial Malkavian wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP? yea the changes in the blog. I like how ppl try to pretend they arent related lol Bet you thought T20 was just another dev and those charges were trumped up too lol
So you don't have any proof, or even evidence, aside from the voices in your head.
Thanks for clarifying. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Laashanna
University of Caille Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.17 18:03:00 -
[373] - Quote
Amarrius Ibn Pontificus wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP? As your leader would say: You're not a valid subscriber, you're a NPC alt. The opinions of NPC alts don't count for anything So come back as your main, ask that again and maybe you'll get an answer.
Or more likely someone will war dec your corp/alliance. Let's not forget this whole thing came about because Mittens decided to war dec his biggest critics. I'm not about to get my entire alliance war dec because I posted with my main. |
LeHarfang
Intersteller Masons Wonder Kids
28
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 01:30:00 -
[374] - Quote
Sorry CCP but that article is bullshit. I've read a lot of your aticles concerning new features and they were literral walls of texts and you said why you did this and that.
Here, all you say is "We did that." and nothing more. WHY WAS THE WAR DEC DE-BALANCED ?!?!
It was perfect before and it gave small alliances and high sec dwellers options to actually GROUP UP and defend themselves against null sec (and other big) alliances!! Now, you broke it again! I have only one thing to say: "Nice Job Breaking It, Hero". |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2335
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 02:08:00 -
[375] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP? yea the changes in the blog. I like how ppl try to pretend they arent related lol Bet you thought T20 was just another dev and those charges were trumped up too lol So you don't have any proof, or even evidence, aside from the voices in your head. Thanks for clarifying.
Its the very definition of a moot point at this stage. All eve players are forbidden to discuss this kind of thing by the new forum rules. Even if somebody did have some kind of evidence of something they would be extremely unwise to post it on the Eve Online forums and should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly.
As such demanding people post "evidence" that would likely get them immediately forum-banned should probably be considered trolling itself.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Sizeof Void
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
244
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 04:58:00 -
[376] - Quote
A lot of interesting points of view in this thread, but, it does seem that CCP's goal is to bring some equivalent of the "excitement" of the null sec wars to high sec.
However, I tend to think that most of the players who currently perma-dwell in high sec aren't all that interested in that sort of "excitement" - which is why they choose to play in high sec in the first place. Miners and industrialists, for example, aren't really all that interested in being shot at, while going about their daily activities. Why do you think so much effort and argument is expended on trying to figure out ways to avoid or shed unwanted wardecs?
In this, there is some similarity to RL - during the '60s and '70s, many folks/corps preferred to live and work in the US rather than in Vietnam or Columbia. Certainly, no one has ever proposed bringing the war, or mercs, to the US, just to keep things exciting. If that were to ever happen, I suspect that many people, and corps, would pack up and leave.
So, I suppose the relative success of the new wardec mechanism - bringing war to those who don't want it - will ultimately be measured by how many players simply unsub when given the choice of "adapt or die" because "Eve is unfair".
In any case, I rather doubt that this sort of forced gameplay will do much to increase the number of new subs. The last couple of times I checked, "unfair" games, of any sort, do not tend to attract a lot of new players. |
Arvedian
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 05:49:00 -
[377] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly.
Any chance you could post your thoughts on the fact that Internal Affairs at CCP is ran by an ex-ceo of goons ? It's pretty outrageous isn't it ?
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
517
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 06:21:00 -
[378] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Scatim Helicon wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote:Alia Gon'die wrote:Antisocial Malkavian wrote: And come on Goons, dont pretend "come at me bro" anymore. You just run screaming to CCP when pp do.
Just like I ask everyone else who mentions this. Do you have any proof of Goons going crying to CCP? yea the changes in the blog. I like how ppl try to pretend they arent related lol Bet you thought T20 was just another dev and those charges were trumped up too lol So you don't have any proof, or even evidence, aside from the voices in your head. Thanks for clarifying. Its the very definition of a moot point at this stage. All eve players are forbidden to discuss this kind of thing by the new forum rules. Even if somebody did have some kind of evidence of something they would be extremely unwise to post it on the Eve Online forums and should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly. As such demanding people post "evidence" that would likely get them immediately forum-banned should probably be considered trolling itself. Even if this was true, there are plenty of arenas beyond the control of CCP where a hypothetical smoking gun could be publicised. Hiding behind the 'I know the Real Secret Truth but I can't prove it because the Powers That Be are covering up the evidence and silencing the witnesses' defence is straight out of paranoid delusional conspiracy theories 101. Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
Khanh'rhh
Sudden Buggery
1346
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 08:39:00 -
[379] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Its the very definition of a moot point at this stage. All eve players are forbidden to discuss this kind of thing by the new forum rules. Even if somebody did have some kind of evidence of something they would be extremely unwise to post it on the Eve Online forums and should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly.
As such demanding people post "evidence" that would likely get them immediately forum-banned should probably be considered trolling itself. It's a moot point, yet you're still writing walls of text on external media about it? O-KAY.
Besides, he asked for a single instance of a member of GSF complaining about the wardec changes, which so far no one has been able to turn up. There is lots of "this is actually very fun" though.
The entire thing has been completely manufactured in your head, and I laugh heartily that the forum rules got changed in the middle of this thread, that effectively make half your posts against the rules when it changes.
Fun times.
On topic, I would still suggest the solution to all this is to just leave the 1.0 pricing system in place but make it so any ally can only join one war under contract in a 2 week period.
The only "exploited" part of this would be that people who were previously paying money to wardec Goons and gank AFK haulers in Jita would be able to attach to the war and do so for free, which isn't game breaking. Everywhere else, someone is going to want to see some money to have the only war they can take part in be a "us vs. 30man corp" affair.
As for Jade, well, he might find he needs to do more to "rally a brave and united highsec to fight the Goons" than ride on the coattails of people who just want to sit in Jita and lock every undocking red, whilst claiming this is emergent gameplay. - "Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual, issued in the 1930's |
Vladimir Vladimirovitch Putain
Remanaquie Federation
11
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 08:49:00 -
[380] - Quote
Arvedian wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly.
Any chance you could post your thoughts on the fact that Internal Affairs at CCP is ran by an ex-ceo of goons ? It's pretty outrageous isn't it ?
No. Tho I apreciate the hilarious potential to keep fueling the tinfoil asshatery... please don't.
On a more serious note, just fix it by making it a free for all. If war dec defenders being allowed to enlist unlimited corps and alliances for free was something unballenced, then work out a system where war dec agressors can do the same, or similar. After all, the purpose of this was to fuel conflict and war, wasn't it? Suddenly I'm seeing changes that will ultimately have the opposite effect.
When did CCP decided to start acting like the freaking UN? |
|
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
140
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 09:04:00 -
[381] - Quote
Vladimir Vladimirovitch Putain wrote:On a more serious note, just fix it by making it a free for all. If war dec defenders being allowed to enlist unlimited corps and alliances for free was something unballanced, then work out a system where war dec agressors can do the same, or similar. After all, the purpose of this was to fuel conflict and war, wasn't it? Suddenly I'm seeing changes that will ultimately have the opposite effect.
When did CCP decided to start acting like the freaking UN?
Seriously. The allies system is such a joke. What next, arenas and battlegrounds? I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Lady Boon
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 12:11:00 -
[382] - Quote
After reading about this change I went back and looked at the original reasons to update the wardec system announced in the Fanfest talk.
My understanding from the talk is that CCP goals were to make wars have more meaning, have consequences, create a Merc market, and move away from a griefing mechanic.
The initial changes supported most of these goals, however there were some unforeseen problems and Merc market didn't florish because of the number of corps willing to fight for nothing.
I completely understand the need to makes changes, but the changes suggested do not support the initial goals, and return the wardec system to the original flawed mechanic. It's doesn't even support the goal of improving the Merc market which was the stated reason for the change in the first place.
Many people have suggested good alternative methods to achieve the original goals for improving the wardec system. My personal preference would be to remove the ally charges and limit the number corps a merc corp can ally with (thus limiting the supply of merc corps available for work).
Most worrying is that CCP seem to have not consulted with the CSM in any meaningful way. While I don't believe that there is any conspiracy, this change appears to be a knee-jerk reaction to the Goonswarm/Solar fleet scenario. Ironically, corps rallying to support Solar fleet is the sort of player driven content that CCP wish to generate.
I sincerely hope CCP will look again at this change.
|
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2340
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 14:25:00 -
[383] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote: It's a moot point, yet you're still writing walls of text on external media about it? O-KAY.
Well I stand by everything I said on the EveNews 24 article and if you take the time to read it yourself you'll see I go out of my way to provide a pretty balanced perspective on the issue. But that was kind of the thing your goon brethen in the post above yours was asking for really so :shrug:
Khanh'rhh wrote:The entire thing has been completely manufactured in your head, and I laugh heartily that the forum rules got changed in the middle of this thread, that effectively make half your posts against the rules when it changes.
And pretty much all the posts that goon senior management made accusing me of being an internet prostitute to try to smear my rep to win the argument also ... as you say "fun times."
Khanh'rhh wrote: On topic, I would still suggest the solution to all this is to just leave the 1.0 pricing system in place but make it so any ally can only join one war under contract in a 2 week period. The only "exploited" part of this would be that people who were previously paying money to wardec Goons and gank AFK haulers in Jita would be able to attach to the war and do so for free, which isn't game breaking. Everywhere else, someone is going to want to see some money to have the only war they can take part in be a "us vs. 30man corp" affair.
I would actually agree with that on the proviso that a mechanism is introduced to allow auto renewal of the 2 week contracts for both the defender and ally (if both have clicked auto renew yes - then the war continues without interruption - if either have clicked no, then the war ends for them at the 2 week mark) this would allow people who wanted to continue a war to keep going without a 24-48 hour break in the middle for no good purpose.
Khanh'rhh wrote:As for Jade, well, he might find he needs to do more to "rally a brave and united highsec to fight the Goons" than ride on the coattails of people who just want to sit in Jita and lock every undocking red, whilst claiming this is emergent gameplay.
Well you see a bit angry that the :effort: required on my half was not much more than the :effort: required on Mittani's behalf to click the button and write some angry tweets. But thats eve, if you want to truly break somebody you need to get out there and do it and I consider I was simply replying to the effort Mittani expended in kind.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 16:21:00 -
[384] - Quote
Khanh'rhh wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:Its the very definition of a moot point at this stage. All eve players are forbidden to discuss this kind of thing by the new forum rules. Even if somebody did have some kind of evidence of something they would be extremely unwise to post it on the Eve Online forums and should instead simply contact Internal Affairs directly.
As such demanding people post "evidence" that would likely get them immediately forum-banned should probably be considered trolling itself. It's a moot point, yet you're still writing walls of text on external media about it? O-KAY. Besides, he asked for a single instance of a member of GSF complaining about the wardec changes, which so far no one has been able to turn up. There is lots of "this is actually very fun" though. The entire thing has been completely manufactured in your head, and I laugh heartily that the forum rules got changed in the middle of this thread, that effectively make half your posts against the rules when it changes. Fun times. On topic, I would still suggest the solution to all this is to just leave the 1.0 pricing system in place but make it so any ally can only join one war under contract in a 2 week period. The only "exploited" part of this would be that people who were previously paying money to wardec Goons and gank AFK haulers in Jita would be able to attach to the war and do so for free, which isn't game breaking. Everywhere else, someone is going to want to see some money to have the only war they can take part in be a "us vs. 30man corp" affair. As for Jade, well, he might find he needs to do more to "rally a brave and united highsec to fight the Goons" than ride on the coattails of people who just want to sit in Jita and lock every undocking red, whilst claiming this is emergent gameplay.
Interestingly, they are able to pull a single post. Unfortunately for them, that single post was made by some nobody after the changes were announced. Self-appointed forums hallway monitor Ask me about-áLa Maison and what it means for you! http://bit.ly/LTW5gW |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
139
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 16:24:00 -
[385] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote: It's a moot point, yet you're still writing walls of text on external media about it? O-KAY.
Well I stand by everything I said on the EveNews 24 article and if you take the time to read it yourself you'll see I go out of my way to provide a pretty balanced perspective on the issue. But that was kind of the thing your goon brethen in the post above yours was asking for really so :shrug:
Why should anyone trust your "fair and balanced perspective" when it is fairly well known that you have a huge bias? Self-appointed forums hallway monitor Ask me about-áLa Maison and what it means for you! http://bit.ly/LTW5gW These wardec rules are not in place for our protection. They're in place for yours. |
Megnamon
The Generic Pirate Corporation Fusion.
19
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 17:39:00 -
[386] - Quote
Goon tears are sweet. I appreciate emergent game play that may be initiated by the sand-box bully, but scoff at the bully who after tables are turned runs to mommy and crys for a swing of the nerf bat... |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2341
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 17:57:00 -
[387] - Quote
Alia Gon'die wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:Khanh'rhh wrote: It's a moot point, yet you're still writing walls of text on external media about it? O-KAY.
Well I stand by everything I said on the EveNews 24 article and if you take the time to read it yourself you'll see I go out of my way to provide a pretty balanced perspective on the issue. But that was kind of the thing your goon brethen in the post above yours was asking for really so :shrug: Why should anyone trust your "fair and balanced perspective" when it is fairly well known that you have a huge bias?
Everyone in Eve has a huge bias. But some of us are capable of writing balanced posts regardless.
The True Knowledge is that nothing matters that does not matter to you, might does make right and power makes freedom Epic Inferno Wardec Test, Sign up and shoot Goons for free! |
Zelda Wei
New Horizon Trade Exchange
164
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 18:54:00 -
[388] - Quote
Eve is a sand box, so do not smother emergent game play in infancy, give it chance to prosper.
The current situation has been a boon for Eve, it's got many interested again.
PCU falls in the summer, so ask why the usual trend has been bucked in the last couple of weeks?
People are getting to like hunting down Goons in high sec. |
Talsha Talamar
Nebula Rasa Holdings Nebula Rasa
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 19:21:00 -
[389] - Quote
If i understand it correctly
Old Inferno: War Declaration on Large Alliances = Insanely Expensive War Declartaion on Small Corporations = Pocket Money Any War Declaration = Unlimited Risk of Escalation by Mutual War & Involvement of Allies
New Inferno: War Declaration on Large Alliances = Sanely Expensive War Declaration on Small Corporations = Pocket Money Any War Declaration = Limited Risk of Escalation by Mutual War & where the Inolvement of Allies is limited by the available Funds
In the "Old Inferno" scenario the risk of escalation worked as an deterrent against Unlimited Warfare by large Alliances, In the "New Inferno" scenario there is no real risk of esclation for the larger attacker anymore.
How is that balance ? |
Pron Fron
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2012.06.18 19:23:00 -
[390] - Quote
Dont know what else to say. The upcoming limitation on Allies is just pain disappointing and clearly puts the advantage back to the aggressor and large alliances, who already have a number and economic advantage. This was the ONLY advantage a smal corp would have - and now its gone, for no good reason.
CCP - I love you guys, but when it comes this war dec, i think it is time you hire a Military Advisor, just as you did for the economy. Could probably help with ship balancing as well.
I honestly dont know why getting this sortied is so difficult. Why cannot I leverage my political capitol and get all the friends I have involved in my cause - why place some arbitrary cost on it. WAR is it OWN COST, you keep saying you want people to PVP, but then this.
Ill give you a small anecdote currently going on. A small 10 man noob training corp steps on the toes of a Large 200 man alliance. Small corp excuses itself and offeres to bow out, but large corp, (admittedly bored) PROMISES to burn everything down and wardec the small corp indefinitely asking for a VERY large sum to end it. They deliberately go after the noobs.
Small corp begins to receive assistance. 5 man corp here, some 10 man there. Within 5 allies, we now have a force that makes the clearly griefing aggressor think twice about camping noobs. they start to back down.
No fee means I dont have to wait to find a better option and that I am not open to alt corp scams. (Yes, some guys use this system and them offer assistance with an alt corp). This could lead to even more bleeding of the receiver assistance or them filling the rans with people who do nothing. Yes we have a history, but lets face it, it has not been around long enough to give a good assessment and still has a long way to go in functionality and auditing.
If we had to pay an aggrigated fee for everyone who WANTED to help us for free or thier own fee, it would have been prohibitave to match the might of the 200 man alliance. Noobs were happy and did not leave the game.
The merc system is a beautiful thing - dont screw it up with this alliance fee. Let the market decide the cost of war, and let PVP corps get the money that would normally go to a NPC sink. If a smaller guy can out match a larger guy by adding 20 5 man corps - then why should he be penalized for that.
Adversely, why are you going to block out smaller corps. It is inevitable this only benefits larger merc corps ans people will be holding out for larger numbers with the limited space.
Some Ideas:
- Honestly I would even remove war costs, again, the price of war is its own thing. I have been a part of three real wars and we never had to pay anyone some 3rd party fee for the privilege. But if there is to be a fee, just make it the wardec. And even that should be more expensive for the LARGER corp/aggressor to simulate logistics cost and bribery considering they are a larger source of potential damage.
- Maybe instead of fees based on member count, could be of total player SP.
- Remove ally costs. Let the players determine fees.
- Assistance fees only kick in based on size of corp/alliance assisting NOT number of total corps.
- "Invite to war" option - Right click on cor/alliance and invite to war. Sometimes you find an enemy of your enemy on a kB, would be great to directly invite them as opposed to tell them, make them find it.
More to come, but kill the alliance fee as it is... its bad... just bad. If I find a bully on the field, and I recruit friends to kick his @SS, I dont need to pay the school $10 for the first friend, $20 for the second... etc.. |
|
|
|
|
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 |