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) |
Dovinian
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1078
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:02:00 -
[121] - Quote
Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere. I also concur. Jade, you're putting words into the mouths of the CSM and it's inexcusable, knock that off and stop trying to run your own "spin control" |
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
97
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:03:00 -
[122] - Quote
Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere.
I think it would be a safe assumption that everyone everywhere is contradicting everything that Jade Constantine says. Self-appointed forums hallway monitor |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2167
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:03:00 -
[123] - Quote
Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere.
Frankly I don't consider anything you've ever said worthy of note and I'm hardly likely to start now.
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! |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
564
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:06:00 -
[124] - Quote
Honestly neither of us are lying. I talked to Kel, he barely remembered the adding cost to allies discussion because it went by so quick. He certainly wasn't pushing for it, and I was not left with the impression he liked it till I talked to him about it today.
Kel explained his position to me as that the ally fees are better than nothing since they'd stop "things from going silly" (which they will). From the merc point of view they're better than nothing but not by much. But I feel the spending power advantage now granted to big/rich groups at the expense of small/poor groups (and the middle guys tbh) outweigh the meager gains mercs get from this.
The "merc tailored" option Soundwave referenced that I pushed for was a cap on allies (2-3 would have been nice) but you would not have any cost for taking them. If you wanted to hire a merc, you could at whatever price you negotiated. If you wanted to bring friends in, you could do it for free. If you wanted to accept free help from strangers (or strangers that buy in to your war dec) you could do that too, or any combination of the three. I feel this would have restored the merc market (the real one, not the Inferno mechanic) close to where it was before Inferno while not further unleveling the playing field between the big guys and the little guys.
I'm sure most of the people opposed to this fees change would be equally opposed to any limiting factor on allies, and certainly would oppose a flat limit. My position is whatever limit to the allies system is put in place should achieve the goal of restoring the viability of the long established mercenary profession that was undermined when the system was launched. I didnt/dont expect the fee system and prices described in this blog to do that, and so would do more harm than good. Arydanika:-á"Alekseyev Karrde mercenary of my heart."-á
CSM7 rep, CSM 4 vet www.noirmercs.com Noir. Academy now recruiting |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
613
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:06:00 -
[125] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
I think the biggest issue here is that we're trying to solve different issues. I'm trying to bring the merc trade back into EVE and you're trying to add some measure of fairness into wars, which Isn't really a design philosophy in EVE.
Why would I want to balance a fight? That's never really been the goal in EVE and the war dec system wasn't built for that either. I understand that it's annoying when a big alliance war decs you, but that's hardly new to EVE. Big alliances get annoyed with bigger coalitions outnumber them and so on. That's a fact of life in EVE and we're not likely to change that direction anytime soon. The other thing is that war dec prices are determined by the value you get from them. If you want to go to war with someone, a higher number of potential targets should be more expensive. If you're a smaller alliance, this makes you a less attractive target, unless you've made someone angry in which case you're responsible for any social repercussions you've created.
Letting attackers add allies conflicts with the notion that attacking someone is risky. If you decide you want to go to war with someone, the consequence is that he could punch harder than you anticipated. If this is just about stacking up allies, the power of that choice fades away a little bit.
Then why are you removing the ability to dogpile allies onto an attacker? It's NOT about 'saving' the merc profession, because these 'free allies' are no substitution for a proper merc corporation. Why do you think the Goons are mocking Jade with this several dozen of 'allies'? These opportunists only provide some distraction at best and everyone knows it (with apparently the exception of you, CCP Soundwave). They are no threat to the merc profession.
There's no good reason to exponentially tax their service. Allies are now quickly more expensive then wardecs FFS!
And here's the problem: there simply aren't enough actual mercs in EVE to help you defend against an entity like GoonSwarm and their CFC, let alone taking the fight to them in DeKlein. So that's why the ability to take in as many 'free allies' should remain, so the defender can at least fight back with de-centralized asymmetric warfare in empire. The only option left, yet CCP wants to take that away as well. How is that not CCP catering to the 'big boys'?
And then the removal of allies in mutual wars: You're removing THE BEST consequence mechanic of Inferno. : facepalm
Without allies in a mutual wardec a corporation will, in reality, NEVER manage to force a stronger attacker into surrendering. Yet this SHOULD be the main 'consequence' design philosophy behind the wardec system! How can CCP be so blind?!
What kind of reasoning is behind this decision? This has NOTHING to do with locking mercs indefinitely , because that issue is simply and completely solved by making ally contracts renewable every two weeks.
This also should have NOTHING to do with unlimited 'free allies' being unfair. Only fools think those 'free' opportunists will ever help you win a war. And only carebears (or pathetic null-bears) think they deserve some 'because we're bigger' protection on top of being bigger and thus able to simply deal with these annoyances (and living in null helps even more). Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2171
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:07:00 -
[126] - Quote
Dovinian wrote:Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere. I also concur. Jade, you're putting words into the mouths of the CSM and it's inexcusable, knock that off and stop trying to run your own "spin control"
So in quoting Alekseyev Karrde's statement that every CSM present at the wardec meeting in Iceland downvoted this proposal you are making the claim I'm somehow "putting words into people's mouths."
Get real.
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! |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2171
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:09:00 -
[127] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:Honestly neither of us are lying. I talked to Kel, he barely remembered the adding cost to allies discussion because it went by so quick. He certainly wasn't pushing for it, and I was not left with the impression he liked it till I talked to him about it today.
Kel explained his position to me as that the ally fees are better than nothing since they'd stop "things from going silly" (which they will). From the merc point of view they're better than nothing. But I feel the spending power advantage now granted to big/rich groups at the expense of small/poor groups (and the middle guys tbh) outweigh the meager gains mercs get from this.
The "merc tailored" option Soundwave referenced that I pushed for was a cap on allies (2-3 would have been nice) but you would not have any cost for taking them. If you wanted to hire a merc, you could at whatever price you negotiated. If you wanted to bring friends in, you could do it for free. If you wanted to accept free help from strangers you could do that too, or any combination of the three. I feel this would have restored the merc market (the real one, not the Inferno mechanic) close to where it was before Inferno while not further unleveling the playing field between the big guys and the little guys.
I'm sure most of the people opposed to this fees change would be equally opposed to any limiting factor on allies, and certainly would oppose a flat limit. My position is whatever limit to the allies system is put in place should achieve the goal of restoring the viability of the long established mercenary profession that was undermined when the system was launched. I didnt/dont expect the fee system and prices described in this blog to do that, and so would do more harm than good.
Thanks for clarifying and showing a bit of class.
Something your fellow CSM's could do with learning.
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! |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
2484
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:09:00 -
[128] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: Stop trying to attack players because you CSM reps cannot seem to get your story straight on this fiasco.
Your disrespectful and venom-filled language is far more of an attack than anything that has been directed at you, stop victimizing yourself. I've tried to be cordial to you throughout this process despite the outrageously false allegations you continue to hurl at the CSM who isn't even to blame for the changes you're so angry about.
Let's entertain the idea for a second that Aleks made a mistake - and didn't hear Kelduum's agreement with the proposal. After all, Aleks was observing the meeting via a Live Stream, and as someone who was in the same position, I can understand how its easy to mistake a statement or miss a few words. Aleks was present, but not physically in the room. He was speaking from what he remembered of the session, filtered through computer audio transmission.
That being said, why in the world have you lashed yourself to THE CSM IS LYING TO US? What difference does it make whether we were unanimous, or *mostly* unanimous, other than to play GOTCHA games and try to discredit us in the process? I fail to understand how clarification here changes the discussion in any kind of significant way. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Alia Gon'die
Aliastra Gallente Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:12:00 -
[129] - Quote
Dovinian wrote:Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere. I also concur. Jade, you're putting words into the mouths of the CSM and it's inexcusable, knock that off and stop trying to run your own "spin control"
You mean Jade isn't going to take us to his "No-spin zone"? Self-appointed forums hallway monitor |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
376
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:13:00 -
[130] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:corestwo wrote:DarthNefarius wrote:lol or here's a calculation I saw in Evenew24: Jade wants to match goon numbers and put together a 9000 person coalition from other 100 man corps/alliance it will cost 3,094,850,098,213,450,687,247,810,550,000,000 isk every two weeks.
If only there were an NPC buy order for pretentious words. Jade would have no problem paying those fees then. See this is the irony about the whole goonie thing. Whenever some poor miner pipes up on GD and goes "oh noes goons ganked my hulk lets all form up a giant alliance and go bash them!" the goons will generally say "come at me bro" and encourage the attack with bluster and bravado. Problem is that the first time we ever got close to actually putting together a hisec coalition to do just that and you guys are backpeddling faster than a trick unicyclist from an escaped tiger. End of the day you guys want the right to do "grief decs" on your terms without effective counter. And you have now got a sequence of game changes to your clear benefit. 1. Loopholes gone - check. 2. 10x the cost to counter dec - check. 3. Mutual lock-in removed - check. 4. Defensive allies priced out of stratosphere - check. And we are going to be stuck with this system for quite some time. So while sure, you guys are going to be eating high the hog for a while - just don't expect the rest of Eve Online to keep eating your line of blather about welcoming wardecs. You don't. You are wardec evaders end of the day - on the grandest scale Eve Online has ever witnessed.
Show me where we have actually said any of what you just claim we said.
You can't find it. Stop making bullshit up.
|
|
Tobiaz
Spacerats
613
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:13:00 -
[131] - Quote
Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere.
Your voters must feel themselves so properly represented in your personage.
Yes, Jade definitely is a dog with a bone when it comes to discussions, but he usually DOES have valid point or at the very least good arguments. You're the fool for simply waiving them away for not liking the person. But I'm guessing as a WH-dweller you don't give a flying **** about what happens in empire. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
38
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:17:00 -
[132] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
I'm sure most of the people opposed to this fees change would be equally opposed to any limiting factor on allies, and certainly would oppose a flat limit. My position is whatever limit to the allies system is put in place should achieve the goal of restoring the viability of the long established mercenary profession that was undermined when the system was launched. I didnt/dont expect the fee system and prices described in this blog to do that, and so would do more harm than good.
I dont se many - if any at all - that think unlimited allies isnt gamebreaking. Even Jade. So thats not the issue here. Unlimited allies is dumb (because only the defender can have them) and need to go.
However, due to Concord, you dont have the freedom nullsec enjoys when it comes to setting up blues and allies that will help fight your enemies. In highsec, you have to be in on the wardec to participate. Which is why the wardec mechanic benefits from an ally system in the first place. But it cannot get out of hand, because unlimited allies essentially kills the mechanic. Hence why a few of us proposes a "numerical parity" mechanic, after which it will hurt financially to escalate, alternatively open up for allies to the agressor as well.
Now, mercenaries. The mercenary marketplace is also utterly destroyed by unlimited "free" allies, which obvioulsy breaks with the stated goals. In a parity mechanic though, focus shifts from numbers to quality. And qualitywise, mercs should be able to compete just fine with a Tom, **** and Harry corporation of 10 bantam pilots.
To summarize, 1) a parity mechanic should hurt you as a defender if you try to achieve numerical superiority, 2) it maintains the (good) change that opened up the highsec wardec mechanic to the sorts of higher level organization that permeates nullsec (diplos, allies, blues etc), and 3) since you will be fighting with roughly equal numbers, quality comes in to play, which lends itself to a descision wether you should hire high quality mercs instead of just relying on your carebear friend corp. |
Mechael
Ouroboros Executor Collective
118
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:18:00 -
[133] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:Two step wrote:I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere. Your voters must feel themselves so properly represented in your personage. Yes, Jade definitely is a dog with a bone when it comes to discussions, but he usually DOES have valid point or at the very least good arguments. You're the fool for simply waiving them away for not liking the person. But I'm guessing as a WH-dweller you don't give a flying **** about what happens in empire.
I was trying to figure out how to say just this. Then again, none of the current CSM really represents me (with the possible exception of Alek) so I may just be a little biased myself. At any rate, I would like to see more discussion and less turd flinging (from everyone, not just the CSM or Jade.)
So far, it's only a few of the random people in this thread and Alek that are both contributing meaningfully without being assholes.
Inferno has been great, with the exception of the inventory system (which is mostly ironed out now) and this "allies" nonsense that seems to be trying to replace the alliance mechanic we already have, and failing miserably at it. I'd rather die in battle against a man who will lie to me, than for a man who will lie to me. |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2172
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:20:00 -
[134] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Your disrespectful and venom-filled language is far more of an attack than anything that has been directed at you, stop victimizing yourself. I've tried to be cordial to you throughout this process despite the outrageously false allegations you continue to hurl at the CSM who isn't even to blame for the changes you're so angry about.
Its a bit late to play the shrinking violet. I've found the collective CSM conduct (with 2 clear exceptions) to be pretty awful throughout this discussion. Most of you have been profoundly disrespectful of fellow players and seemed to have taken an absolute joy in speaking down and condescending through this. If you want "respect" then you need to show it.
I'm not even sure what "false accusations" you are talking about now - surely you aren't going to challenge the assertion that these changes are to benefit of the big guys and will do nothing to help the merc profession in Eve? I'm in complete agreement with Alekseyev's assessment of the impact these changes will have on the game henceforth.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: Let's entertain the idea for a second that Aleks made a mistake - and didn't hear Kelduum's agreement with the proposal. After all, Aleks was observing the meeting via a Live Stream, and as someone who was in the same position, I can understand how its easy to mistake a statement or miss a few words. Aleks was present, but not physically in the room. He was speaking from what he remembered of the session, filtered through computer audio transmission.
So if mistakes were make they get owned up and we move on. The problem has occured because most of the CSM who have responded to these threads have been spinning and wriggling and evading and spin-doctoring and out and out trolling without even trying to give straight answers. That gets old fast.
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: That being said, why in the world have you lashed yourself to THE CSM IS LYING TO US? What difference does it make whether we were unanimous, or *mostly* unanimous, other than to play GOTCHA games and try to discredit us in the process? I fail to understand how clarification here changes the discussion in any kind of significant way.
Well since you ask, its because I wanted to know whether the CSM was unanimous in the condemnation of this change so I had to option of saying that to Soundwave when he admitted the changes were his. Its a fairly strong argument to tell a developer that the player council was opposed to a change he is dead set on bringing into the game. But I wanted to get my argument straight and have some confidence I wasn't going to get contradicted. Hence this was something I needed to know and I sought clarification.
It hasn't helped that most of the CSM has been spinning and trolling and running interference and tripping each other up and engaging in ad hominem attacks rather than being prepared to answer straight questions.
End of the day, I hope this is something you learn from.
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! |
Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
143
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:22:00 -
[135] - Quote
134th!!!
Sensible changes I think, but I'm out of touch with war. |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
376
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:22:00 -
[136] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:I'm not even sure what "false accusations" you are talking about now - surely you aren't going to challenge the assertion that these changes are to benefit of the big guys and will do nothing to help the merc profession in Eve? I'm in complete agreement with Alekseyev's assessment of the impact these changes will have on the game henceforth.
"These changes will incidentally benefit the big guys" is not what you are and have been arguing. What you are and have been arguing is "These changes were put in place at the request (or because the whining) of the big guys."
There is a very large difference there, and frankly it isn't true either way, as we'd prefer to have an abundance of targets for the goons who do like shooting up highsec. |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
86
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:23:00 -
[137] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:Two step wrote:Jade Constantine wrote: Stop telling fibs and get on the spin control over at Eve news 24 weaselor. Only one CSM member tried to contradict me and he wasn't ever at the meeting referenced.
I haven't been reading what you have been posting because, frankly, it is boring and terrible. Please consider me to be contradicting everything you are saying everywhere. Your voters must feel themselves so properly represented in your personage. Yes, Jade definitely is a dog with a bone when it comes to discussions, but he usually DOES have valid point or at the very least good arguments. You're the fool for simply waiving them away for not liking the person. But I'm guessing as a WH-dweller you don't give a flying **** about what happens in empire and wardecs. edit: how about the CSM stop bitching on Jade and start defending CCP's decision to toss the dogpile mechanic and remove allies from mutual wars. I would LOVE to see some good reasons justifying those decisions, because CCP isn't offering any.
Both null and w-space pilots really don't care about high sec war decs. Alekseyev was the only member of CSM to actually be impacted by any war dec changes, really. He's already made his opinion on the matter clear. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
614
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:24:00 -
[138] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:
Now, mercenaries. The mercenary marketplace is also utterly destroyed by unlimited "free" allies, which obvioulsy breaks with the stated goals. In a parity mechanic though, focus shifts from numbers to quality. And qualitywise, mercs should be able to compete just fine with a Tom, **** and Harry corporation of 10 bantam pilots. .
You can't be serious about a rag-tag bunch of opportunistic 'free allies' putting proper mercs out of a job.
They'll provide with some distraction for your attacker at best, but they'll only serve their own interests.
Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
None ofthe Above
199
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:26:00 -
[139] - Quote
I'd like to see CSM members stop beating up on Jade, who has some valid points, even if the conjecture about the motivations for the change may or may not be on the mark.
I'd also be a good thing if Jade could put aside the accusations, and lets have a constructive talk about the effects.
...
I agree with Aleks and CCP about the need to reform the "Ally system" to live up to the promise of the "Mercenary Marketplace".
It is interesting that the name change matched the functionality rather well. As predicted (by yours truly among others) it wasn't used by Mercs. Grudges and opportunities where the only thing that would entice people to being locked into a war they couldn't control getting out of. As a result, Mercenaries are an endangered species.
The two week contract time fixes that. Bravo!
The geometrically increasing charge for allies on the other hand may not call for cheers, however.
I am not sure it even helps the Mercs to have these charges to CONCORD. Sure a few companies will get business again, but it hurts smaller starter merc companies (choose your mercs wisely indeed).
It nukes the interesting defense coalitions that have sprung up around some of these wars. Where is the praise for emergent game play and sandbox systems in this regard?
I'd like to see the two week timer go in and leave the ally fees out. That may be enough to revive the Mercenary trade without disrupting the emerging allies. Doing both at the same time twists too many dials at once and I am not sure if we can be clear on the results. If fees are put in place (now or later), I don't think uncapped geometric is the way to go.
BTW - I've seen the 30+ allies called "absurd on its face" and ridiculous. Personally I'd think "karma" is a better description. I've only seen it reported to be happening with big alliances that have "ruining your game" as a reason for existence, attacking smaller entities. Its interesting to actually see people banding together to fight that.
|
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
40
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:29:00 -
[140] - Quote
Tobiaz wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:
Now, mercenaries. The mercenary marketplace is also utterly destroyed by unlimited "free" allies, which obvioulsy breaks with the stated goals. In a parity mechanic though, focus shifts from numbers to quality. And qualitywise, mercs should be able to compete just fine with a Tom, **** and Harry corporation of 10 bantam pilots. .
You can't be serious about a rag-tag bunch of opportunistic 'free allies' putting proper mercs out of a job. They'll provide with some distraction for your attacker at best, but they'll only serve their own interests.
Thats exactly what I am saying. as long as you limit "free allies" to numerical parity in a wardec situatiuon, pro mercs should have no probs competing. But if it comes to a point where numerical superiority compensates for quality, that is obviously not the case any more. |
|
Kody Grey
Banana Pants Incorporated
26
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:31:00 -
[141] - Quote
In 0.0 sec space (Wormholes, Null Sec) a group of smaller entities are free to dog-pile against a single larger entity. I don't play in Null Sec on a regular basis but I have been in a few good fights in wormhole space where this happens quite often. Now, before this fix its currently possible to do the same in High sec.
Why is that bad? Never ending war across all of Eve? Let me introduce you to this thing called PVP. The single giant entity could always just surrender if they need a breather. Nothing is broken about that concept. Totally player driven. |
Jade Constantine
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
2178
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:32:00 -
[142] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:I'd like to see CSM members stop beating up on Jade, who has some valid points, even if the conjecture about the motivations for the change may or may not be on the mark.
I'd also be a good thing if Jade could put aside the accusations, and lets have a constructive talk about the effects.
...
I agree with Aleks and CCP about the need to reform the "Ally system" to live up to the promise of the "Mercenary Marketplace".
It is interesting that the name change matched the functionality rather well. As predicted (by yours truly among others) it wasn't used by Mercs. Grudges and opportunities where the only thing that would entice people to being locked into a war they couldn't control getting out of. As a result, Mercenaries are an endangered species.
The two week contract time fixes that. Bravo!
The geometrically increasing charge for allies on the other hand may not call for cheers, however.
I am not sure it even helps the Mercs to have these charges to CONCORD. Sure a few companies will get business again, but it hurts smaller starter merc companies (choose your mercs wisely indeed).
It nukes the interesting defense coalitions that have sprung up around some of these wars. Where is the praise for emergent game play and sandbox systems in this regard?
I'd like to see the two week timer go in and leave the ally fees out. That may be enough to revive the Mercenary trade without disrupting the emerging allies. Doing both at the same time twists too many dials at once and I am not sure if we can be clear on the results. If fees are put in place (now or later), I don't think uncapped geometric is the way to go.
BTW - I've seen the 30+ allies called "absurd on its face" and ridiculous. Personally I'd think "karma" is a better description. I've only seen it reported to be happening with big alliances that have "ruining your game" as a reason for existence, attacking smaller entities. Its interesting to actually see people banding together to fight that.
Good post. For the record I'm very happy to discuss improvements to this 1.1 mechanic - and if people can get away from the trolly-flaminess lets do it. "Why this change happened" is now really something for Eve History, In Character propaganda, and 3rd party sites - so lets move on to pure mechanics if its possible and see if there is some kind of resolution to this mess.
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! |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
87
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:38:00 -
[143] - Quote
None ofthe Above wrote:I agree with Aleks and CCP about the need to reform the "Ally system" to live up to the promise of the "Mercenary Marketplace".
It is interesting that the name change matched the functionality rather well. As predicted (by yours truly among others) it wasn't used by Mercs. Grudges and opportunities where the only thing that would entice people to being locked into a war they couldn't control getting out of. As a result, Mercenaries are an endangered species.
The two week contract time fixes that. Bravo!
Yes. Looking at the massive list of corps and alliances that have "come to the aid" of Honda Accord or Star Fraction finds the usual suspects from the old, broken, "war dec everyone and camp Jita undock" types (and a few other of the more respectable high sec war dec'ers of old - nod to Moar Tears).
None ofthe Above wrote:The geometrically increasing charge for allies on the other hand may not call for cheers, however.
I am not sure it even helps the Mercs to have these charges to CONCORD. Sure a few companies will get business again, but it hurts smaller starter merc companies (choose your mercs wisely indeed).
CCP had to put a limiter on there or defenders would go for the quantity over quality approach which is the antithesis of what promotes the use of good merc groups.
These changes are reasonable. However, it dos not address the root problem of a lack of real victory or defeat conditions in high sec wars. Okay, now a defender has a rational reason to hire a merc. What is the merc's stated goal to bring about favorable end to this war for the defender? The attacker can toss on a war, but for what purpose? It is still impossible to actually pin down an entity in high sec and demand their submission.
War decs are broken at their core. Arguing these mechanics is pretty useless. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
617
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:43:00 -
[144] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:
Good post. For the record I'm very happy to discuss improvements to this 1.1 mechanic - and if people can get away from the trolly-flaminess lets do it. "Why this change happened" is now really something for Eve History, In Character propaganda, and 3rd party sites - so lets move on to pure mechanics if its possible and see if there is some kind of resolution to this mess.
The best way, the only way, would be reversal of the removal of allies in mutual wars (making them essentially useless), and removing the exponential fee from allies (instead a fixed 10 to 25 M to keep out the worst thrash would be fine). Weaker corporations need to keep their ability to unleash a plague of opportunists when wardecced by the biggest alliances. And the game NEEDS the option for weaker corporations to force a stronger attacker into surrender (mutual+allies) as the MAIN 'consequence' mechanic of Inferno.
The 'free allies' by the way were never a threat to proper mercs. Good luck trying to get them to defend your mining op or take down an enemy POS. They'll just camp the hubs and routes and if you're lucky go after some targets of opportunity, restricting Empire activities (of what are mostly null-alliances).
No, mercs were handicapped actually by the unlimited time of ally agreements (fixed) and by the complete absence of a contract market for them to advertise their services. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:45:00 -
[145] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote:None ofthe Above wrote:I'd like to see CSM members stop beating up on Jade, who has some valid points, even if the conjecture about the motivations for the change may or may not be on the mark.
I'd also be a good thing if Jade could put aside the accusations, and lets have a constructive talk about the effects.
...
I agree with Aleks and CCP about the need to reform the "Ally system" to live up to the promise of the "Mercenary Marketplace".
It is interesting that the name change matched the functionality rather well. As predicted (by yours truly among others) it wasn't used by Mercs. Grudges and opportunities where the only thing that would entice people to being locked into a war they couldn't control getting out of. As a result, Mercenaries are an endangered species.
The two week contract time fixes that. Bravo!
The geometrically increasing charge for allies on the other hand may not call for cheers, however.
I am not sure it even helps the Mercs to have these charges to CONCORD. Sure a few companies will get business again, but it hurts smaller starter merc companies (choose your mercs wisely indeed).
It nukes the interesting defense coalitions that have sprung up around some of these wars. Where is the praise for emergent game play and sandbox systems in this regard?
I'd like to see the two week timer go in and leave the ally fees out. That may be enough to revive the Mercenary trade without disrupting the emerging allies. Doing both at the same time twists too many dials at once and I am not sure if we can be clear on the results. If fees are put in place (now or later), I don't think uncapped geometric is the way to go.
BTW - I've seen the 30+ allies called "absurd on its face" and ridiculous. Personally I'd think "karma" is a better description. I've only seen it reported to be happening with big alliances that have "ruining your game" as a reason for existence, attacking smaller entities. Its interesting to actually see people banding together to fight that. Good post. For the record I'm very happy to discuss improvements to this 1.1 mechanic - and if people can get away from the trolly-flaminess lets do it. "Why this change happened" is now really something for Eve History, In Character propaganda, and 3rd party sites - so lets move on to pure mechanics if its possible and see if there is some kind of resolution to this mess.
What you fail to understand here is that THIS IS THE BLOODY IMPROVEMENT :). Sorry about the yelling but I do not think jade is listening to the 5 CSM reps or the other 100 people telling him that he is batshit crazy. |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
570
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:46:00 -
[146] - Quote
Jade Constantine wrote: I'm in complete agreement with Alekseyev's assessment of the impact these changes will have on the game henceforth.
Could you...not agree with me? I'd like to remain relevant after this is all over, and regardless of what you think Jade your behavior in threads, attacks on CCP employees, attacks on the CSM, and general tinfoil hattery have established you as kind of a loon.
I don't think CCP is in the pocket of Goonswarm or anyone else. Soundwave and SoniClover are not making these changes to benefit because three days ago a group of 9000 forum nerds got worried about people who aren't attacking their centers of activity, wealth, or population.
It doesn't have to be a Goon conspiracy to be a poor choice of options. Arydanika:-á"Alekseyev Karrde mercenary of my heart."-á
CSM7 rep, CSM 4 vet www.noirmercs.com Noir. Academy now recruiting |
Dabigredboat
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:49:00 -
[147] - Quote
What I do like about this change is the ability to police something that would have otherwise been broken. The fact that 100 different alliances, each with any number of possible people COULD engage in a free wardec system was broken. Goons have 9k members because unlike most of empire we generate content and use organization levels that star fraction and other empire only alliances would dream of having.
I for one am happy that alliances that play like pandemic legion, that are the mercs of eve, will finally be able to earn their way into contracts and have to prove they are quality enough to be HIRED and not just given free rides. |
Marlona Sky
Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies.
1139
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:49:00 -
[148] - Quote
I no idea rag-tag groups of 'nobodies' were a serious threat to suposed 'real' mercenary groups. Food for thought I guess.
Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner! |
Atum
Eclipse Industrials STR8NGE BREW
60
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:50:00 -
[149] - Quote
Alia Gon'die wrote:Basically what I get out of this thread is that there is a whiney babby whining that he isn't able to get free help anymore.
Edit: And also it's because the terrible goonies are crying and running to mommy because the whiney babby doesn't like them. Yeah, pretty much.
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:It doesn't have to be a Goon conspiracy to be a poor choice of options. Poor choice of options, poor choice of timing... CCP's had a fair bit of the first, and a LOT of the second, in the 8+ years I've been playing. |
Tobiaz
Spacerats
618
|
Posted - 2012.06.13 21:51:00 -
[150] - Quote
Dabigredboat wrote:Jade Constantine wrote:
Good post. For the record I'm very happy to discuss improvements to this 1.1 mechanic - and if people can get away from the trolly-flaminess lets do it. "Why this change happened" is now really something for Eve History, In Character propaganda, and 3rd party sites - so lets move on to pure mechanics if its possible and see if there is some kind of resolution to this mess.
What you fail to understand here is that THIS IS THE BLOODY IMPROVEMENT :). Sorry about the yelling but I do not think jade is listening to the 5 CSM reps or the other 100 people telling him that he is batshit crazy.
All of whom have a personal grudge against the person of Jade himself or are on the receiving end of an annoying dogpile.
Inferno 1.1 is NOT an improvement. It basically nullifies that actual wardec improvements made by Inferno. Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!-á Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors! |
|
|
|
|
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 |