Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Legion
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 01:12:00 -
[1]
Hey guys sup? Anyway there is a lot of raging and whinning going on but you know that never gets anything accomplished or changes anything in game. you know it, I know it, ccp knows it. So after reading some 1303 pages of whine I have compiled a list of changes that not only I would like to see but others.
Guys don't whine in here just keep it to useful comments. sayin you suck or blaaa is a #%@#4 or ccp fix %#$%$#543 isnt going to get it accomplished. That being said here is the proposal.
1. Assault frigates: While in the beta for dominion we did see that nice velocity bonus it did not make it to the actual dominion release nor did it for 1.1. So for dominion 1.2 Could we see that AB bonus again, That would make AF very useful in fleet battles.
2. Balancing tech 3. I know this is a steep order but hear me out. I am a t3 pilot myself I own a legion and a proteus. While I do love my tech 3 ships I am finding that there is a serious balance issue both pve and pvp. The legion though powerful is also restrained in many ways. Recently I doo my legion out for some pve doing drone complexes. What I did notice is that even with a t2 webber and pulses you cannot hit drones orbiting you even with with a tracking computer with the tracknig script. They were simply moving too fast, how ever the 1 missile slot did kill them eventually.
This shows me that there is a problem not only with laser tracking on them but also as a range, ans even with mulit's the falloff was too high and i could no hit them.
Solution -- The legion offensive, or defensive subsustems need a drone bay 25m¦ would be perfect. This would provide more dps balance and help the gun boat actually defend against smaler targets. such as interceptors. This solution would also be good for the Loki, and a 15m for the tengu.
3. Black ops - cloak Ok it shoudl have the covert ops cloak bu tI can also see where that would make the ship too powerful. How about we comprimise on this one, keep to covert ops cloak but give a velocity and agility penalty as it is a battleshp. I think its sounds good.
4. Regular Dev communication Yeah the dev blogs are cool, but you know we need better communication between us and you guys. I remember a while back one dev member must have spent the entire day on the fourms just answering questions, and wouldnt you know it. Most of the QQ and whining stopped. I work myself and have a lot of meetings, maybe when you have a dev meeting you can tell us what you talked about, say you talked about how to work on AF? let us know what you talked about and what input you guys had from each other. Or you know sov warfare is a hot topic so maybe tell us what your thoughts were at this moment. You could also get more feed back from players this way and we can ultimately work together to make a more fluid game.
5. Sov warfare.
Ok yeah this is is a touchy subject but I do have an interesting idea first SBU prices should be decreased by about eh 25% Reason : some systems have 4-5 gates and this makes trying to capture 1 system very expensive. and with current lag issues almost undoable.
Possible solution : When placing a SBU unit on a gate have it affect 2 systems. This will force people to spread out to defend their sbu's but attacker to spread out also to find and destroy the sbu's. So instead of 1 big blob you have 3-5 smaller ones. I dont know im just tossing out an idea there.
Ok im about out of characters.
In closing Im trying not to whine im not saying fix this whith angry faces and profanity like others I am giving you ideas on how issues could be fixed, which I assume is what you want.
Anyway good luck with the lag monster I hope you kill it soon though Jita runs great.
|
elenor drifter
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 02:05:00 -
[2]
i totaly support this .
especialy point 4, come on devs keep us in the loop what are u planing, also update ur drawingboard for up coming relices some of the stuff on there is age old news
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Legion
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 04:02:00 -
[3]
I have been thinking and one issue that I forgot to touch on was the 5th subsystem for tech 3 ships.
I keep thinking this is something hard to address and is really a pandoras box of ideas of what to do. But I have thought of one thing, rather than have the 5th subsystem why dont we have a regular ship bonus?
As it stands we only have bonuses to hit damage on the hull, why not add something new to each ship specific of each race. Similar to carriers bonus to each race.
Gallente - Drone Damage bonus, armor rep bonus
Caldari - rof bonus, explosion velocity bonus, missile velocity bonus something liek that.
Minmtar - ROF bonus, shield boost bonus, damage bonus, speed bonus
Amarr - resist bonus, tracking bonus, capacitor bonus.
I think this could be a fair trade for 5th sub system, dont really need to have all of the bonuses, but just giving some ideas of what the hull should have as a second bonus.
What has to be considered is how bonuses would stack with the subsystems.
Example Liquid crystal mags
it adds a 50% optimal bonus, so if the hull offered 50% also with amarr stratigic 5, then the bonus should be optimal + 1 * (optimal bonus subsystem + optimal bonus hull) Non stacking
As stated earlier this is just a thought on a possible solution to the 5th subsystem dilema.
CCP hope these thoughts give you direction.
Quote: null
|
Ai Mei
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 07:52:00 -
[4]
While I do support a lot of this, especially #4, point #5 could cause a lot more problems, but also could keep things interesting as the defenders would have to guess which system is going to be the target one.
I think the major problem is, with this sov system there is no way to "surprise attack" anyone. The SBU telegraph your attack.
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Legion
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 20:18:00 -
[5]
Yeah sov warfare is very touchy but still need more ideas of how to help fix it and make it even.
come on eve give some ideas not whines.
Quote: null
|
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Legion
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 04:00:00 -
[6]
point #6 t2 insurance.
T2 insurance should not pay for the entire ship like people want, otherwise we will see tech 2 suicide ganks, but I do agree with an increased pay out, say 60% of the market value.
Quote: null
|
Midnight Firestarter
Anger Management
|
Posted - 2010.02.22 18:36:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Midnight Firestarter on 22/02/2010 18:36:36 Neutral Remote Reaping should be changed to alliance or corp members only.
Six years and counting "war targets only on overview".
No insurance for Conkordon Ships
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |