| 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 - 0 post(s) |
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
   |
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:25:00 -
[1]
A recent dev blog stated that deep safes are going to be removed along with any items outside this new "Wall".
We the undersigned disagree with the planned removal of existing deep safes (and related destruction of property) and request that CCP re-evaluate this decision with input from the players.
Alternative methods for finding deep safes etc can be discussed, but the focus here is to show CCP that the players disagree with further limiting the sandbox.
Please reply to this thread and tick the "support this topic" box to register your dissatisfaction.
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
Nareg Maxence
JotunHeim Hird
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:32:00 -
[2]
Signed.
At least move stuff inside the wall instead of just destroying it.
|
TeaDaze
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:36:00 -
[3]
Supporting this of course.
Would be nice for CCP to take player feedback seriously and hopefully following the CSM procedure will allow that...
Vote TeaDaze for CSM5!
|
Alice Rubidinous
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:36:00 -
[4]
ccp u suk teh big one
|
DJ BlackLight
Eve Radio Corporation
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:38:00 -
[5]
Absolutely signed.
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:39:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Aineko Macx on 13/04/2010 11:39:20
Yes! There are practical and conceptual problems with the change.
And if they insist on limiting the range, why not some reasonable limit like 100au?
One wonders how this issue crept to the top of the giant backlog 
|
Norneguest
DEATHFUNK
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:40:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Norneguest on 13/04/2010 11:40:14
Signed.
Seriously CCP, this is what you spend time doing!?!?
|
Rutger Centemus
Dvice Shipyards
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:40:00 -
[8]
Signed.
 Originally by: Crumplecorn
I prefer launching bathtubs of antimatter at my opponents over pointing an open DVD player at them, even if the bathtubs do miss a lot. So no.
|
Dodgy Past
Debitum Naturae
BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:43:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Dodgy Past on 13/04/2010 11:43:17
Is an absolute ******ed disaster.
Poorly thought out and using a justification that could be used again and again to damage the game further.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
you seem determined to turn it into ******* Hollyoaks for neckbeards. |
Elendar
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:44:00 -
[10]
yep
|
Kormorant
Gallente
Oneirocritica Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:45:00 -
[11]
It is good that they are being removed.
The only harsh thing is destruction of ships location past the "border".
Besides, new opportunities arise from this assuming they don't change the border distance as the patch is released 
|
Othran
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:45:00 -
[12]
Signed. Needs a lot more thought.
|
Silas Sanyasi
Agony Unleashed
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:47:00 -
[13]
Signed.
The property destruction is way too harsh an approach... |
Tasha Voronina
Caldari Navy Reserve Force
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:48:00 -
[14]
Totally signed.
<somewhat off-topic rant>
I'd be more or less fine with a soft limit as I outlined in my post, but a hard limit? Come on, this is EVE we're talking about! Expanding on (possibly) unintended but harmless game mechanics happened before, why not deep safes?
Other than that, simply deleting "stuff" outside this imaginary border is... well... somewhat like saying: "hey, we deem that all players must be equal, hence we will remove ISK and SP from the game and everything will be free for everyone" - because that's such a good idea, right?
</somewhat off-topic rant> |
Patoa
Mercurialis Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:49:00 -
[15]
Signed.
Fix the grid load issues first - you're destroying the only tool players have to get around the problems created by your botched expansion.
Don't destroy logged off supercaps - I can't believe you're actually considering/intending to do this as its incredibly heavy handed and unfair to players who happen to be on a break (you can be sure that said players will never return to the game if you do this). |
Bruno Bourque
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:51:00 -
[16]
Eve isnt meant to be fair imo. |
Shalyra Wyn
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:52:00 -
[17]
|
Grarr Dexx
GK inc.
Panda Team
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:55:00 -
[18]
This direction isn't one for the better of Eve. Deep safes added something to the game, which you are removing by adding another arbitrary barrier in this unlimited game. |
Kirith Kodachi
m3 Corp
Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:57:00 -
[19]
I disagree with any limiting of where a ship can warp to. Change probing mechanics if you feel the need to, but further restricting warping in system is too much. |
Interghast
Agony Unleashed
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:57:00 -
[20]
Terribly proposed implementation from CCP |
Noxyra
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:57:00 -
[21]
Signed and 100% supported. These changes should not occur as they are currently planned & designed. Ever. |
ElvenLord
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:58:00 -
[22]
mail is sent to CCP with CSMs concern about this matter, and this issue will be on next CSM meeting as urgent :D |
Rockin RicciBobbi
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:59:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Rockin RicciBobbi on 13/04/2010 11:59:37
What you are considering will hurt a lot of players. Players who made this game a success.
I'm relatively new but if I invest months or years of training time and resource gathering into getting a supercap I will want my safe spot for it to stay safe and I don't want it to get arbitrarily destroyed for no reason other than someone's completely idiotic idea of "balancing the game."
|
Dierdra Vaal
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:59:00 -
[24]
signed. in addition to removing deep safes, the destruction of any property in those safes is completely unacceptable.
Director of Education :: EVE University
CSM1 delegate and CSM3 chairman
|
Winston Revenge
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 11:59:00 -
[25]
Improve deep space probes instead of hard capping system sizes.
|
Serpents smile
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:00:00 -
[26]
I like the idea to give a function to 64 128 AU scan probes.If you really need to limit how far deep safes can go then use those 2 numbers, not some arbitrary distance.
Also deliberately destroying players pixels they worked month's/ years on is just wrong.
|
Kayleigh Lothian
KIA Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:00:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Winston Revenge
Improve deep space probes instead of hard capping system sizes.
This.
----------------------
|
Miep Miep
Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:06:00 -
[28]
Get some devs who actualy play this game. plz
|
iridize
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:08:00 -
[29]
Signed.
What on earth were you thinking CCP ?
Though it would seem that perhaps you weren't? |
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:09:00 -
[30]
Supported
|
| |
|
| 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 |