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) |
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:10:00 -
[31]
Supported.
|
Astro Glide
Black Nova Corp IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:10:00 -
[32]
|
McFly
Peanut Factory BricK sQuAD.
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:15:00 -
[33]
Edited by: McFly on 13/04/2010 12:14:54 Why is that CCP is so actively against veterans? I mean seriously whats the beef. Your company has been built on our subscriptions for the last 7 years. Eve has been a long ever evolving story that many of us have shared with CCP. This change isn't about being fair for new players. I can make a trial account right now and have an ibis as far from the center of any system I start in as I want. Emergency warps may be an exploit now, but all it requires is effort, and time. Anyone can do it, so why is CCP using this whole veteran vs noob debate?
My hypothesis is that due to the fact that newer players (those playing less than 2 years) outnumber veterans (5-7 years) that CCP expects the old vs. new debate to rally 07s, 08s, 09s, and 10s to their cause.
This game is about who can figure "it" out, then implement what they've discovered tactically, and succeed because of it. Whether thats in the market, pvp, or pve.
You want to make this about old vs new. Well lets fix that up. Delete all items then reset all wallets and SP to 0. See if the veterans resubscribe, or anyone else for that matter.
We've been here for years CCP, we held your hand through bugs, Dev misconduct, exploits, boot.ini, scandals, poor customer service, clueless GMs, nerfs, node crashes, bad mechanics, terrible public relations and everything else.
CCP has made us embrace "adapt or die". Anyone playing this game for a considerable amount of time has accepted that. But invoking the newbie argument of "tears, older players, tears" over something that has very little to do with old vs. new is really stupid.
|
Sperrzone
Stardust Heavy Industries Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:20:00 -
[34]
Supported
|
Kazekari
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:20:00 -
[35]
\o/
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:22:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 13/04/2010 12:23:17
CCP, you doing it wrong, you should draw a fence at the 10 AU system border - I mean for destructing the immersion of space travel properly.
|
Ap0ll0n
Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:24:00 -
[37]
Signed.. Its terrible.. Fix lag instead.
|
EYEDOLL
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:28:00 -
[38]
|
Brentum Kaltarr
Elemental Foundries
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:29:00 -
[39]
Arbitrary removal without consultation ... Not good form at all
|
Furryfriday
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:32:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Furryfriday on 13/04/2010 12:32:01 First fix lag, then deep safes. Or just adjust the scan mechanics or bring 'alternatives' for entering an system in an safe way with the existing issues as someone else, somewhere said.
|
|
Carver DiGriz
Agony Unleashed
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:38:00 -
[41]
And how! Supported.
|
Scoutsy
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:40:00 -
[42]
Signed
|
Tjarish
Point of No Return Waterboard
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:43:00 -
[43]
Removing the ability to have deep safes is lame, improve scanning instead (range of the deep space probe 1,000 AU?)
|
Carenthor Loon
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:48:00 -
[44]
I can personally live without the deep safes, but I'm supporting this due to the heavy-handed property destruction, the new nerf to Astrometrics V and most importantly the lack of player consultation. |
Lord EmBra
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:50:00 -
[45]
/Signed
CCP should instead of pushing this away embrace it, continue what their players have started and build upon it.
There is a lot of space not being used, make it possible to go anywhere without using exploits instead, but also improve probing accordingly.
Do not make the sandbox smaller!
|
D melanogaster
The Fruit Flys
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:53:00 -
[46]
This is one of those backlashes that could have been avoided if they had even mentioned it in passing to the CSM. If they had done it it would have at least been better thought out. I just home CCP isn't so prideful that they aren't willing to listen..
//support
|
Kallasha
Caldari Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:55:00 -
[47]
signed 100%
|
mr passie
Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:57:00 -
[48]
Edited by: mr passie on 13/04/2010 12:57:38 I'm with my NC brosefs on this one
|
Siiee
Recycled Heroes Codemonkey Construction Project
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 12:57:00 -
[49]
Supported
|
NeoFusion
Freelancer Union Unaffiliated
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:00:00 -
[50]
Supported
|
|
Kalan Ikuru
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:00:00 -
[51]
I was disappointed to hear about the changes to making deep safes when they first surfaced, but this is just crazy.
|
Al'ar Darkwind
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:00:00 -
[52]
Supported.
There is no need for this change right now and the negatives far outweigh the positives.
|
Karak Terrel
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:02:00 -
[53]
The problem is not that there are deep safespots, the problem is that you have to use an exploit to create one.
Just introduce a way to create one and i would prefer a challenging way, not just "move probe here. warp". Something where you have to think, calculate, solve problems.. whatever, it should not be easy to do.
My idea for this is a new warpdrive mechanic, and also the techi **** behind (cause this is scifi k ):
1. The theory of why you can't just... If you have a bookmark of a point in space it is not just coordinates, it contains also a lot of information about the spacetime topology itself in this target region. Only with this information the warpdrive is able to lock on and warp to this point. Without the information of the topologie the warp bubble may not terminate at a specific point but spread over some distance which results in you and your ship also "spread" over the same distance.. However, probes are small and unmaned so they can use different warp mechanics which lead to very high accl/decl forces (which can't be compensated) but prevent them from beeing vaporized while exiting warp in unknown spacetime topology. If used to scan signatures, probes use an active scann system to eventualy find the object and use it as a reference point to measure the topology at the target. Without this artificial reference point it is impossible for a probe to determine the point it should measure. They can also not act as they'r own reference point, they are too small to act as a beacon that is strong enought.
2. One first Idea how you can do it (maybe this is a bad idea cause it may be boring) There are other "probes" that act as a beacon, but they are not able to enter warp, they have to use the relativistic way, while sending out a signal that can be tracked down. To launch such a probe you need to anchor an accelerator which accelerates the beacon into a specific direction. You can also use gravitation of planets to increase the speed of the beacon (there should be various other factors), but this will result in a different direction. Once the beacon is on its way to the outer solar system you can track it down with your probes, but it will always move while you are scanning. The beacon will not deccelerate except from the cosmic medium which "scources" the beacon at this high velocity and limits its lifetime. As the beacon can not pass the lightspeed barrier it will take some time to travel and you don't exactly know how long it will last. The faster it travels the more likely it is that it gets destroyed early and the harder it is to track down.
3. Other Maybe someone has a better idea, there was always this deadspace thing which may also result in a interesting and maybe more challenging idea how to get deep safespots. At least CCP talked at fanfest about some plans around deadspace.
Would like to see some thought from others on this or other ideas.
less whining more thinking!!
|
Kire Nosslrak
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:02:00 -
[54]
|
Solway
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:06:00 -
[55]
signed
Deep Safe spots are atm the only way to prevent the grid load issue.
|
Uryence
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:06:00 -
[56]
Perhaps 'something should be done' about deep safes, but this method seems pretty unfair to my (admittedly relatively new to Eve) mind. |
Ven Dak
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:07:00 -
[57]
356 replies to the info thread in 17 hours, that beats even the Insurance change thread in the same period of time, and all over a much simpler issue.
|
DocFloyd
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:08:00 -
[58]
Edited by: DocFloyd on 13/04/2010 13:08:13 Signed! CCP! If you remove jumplag, gridlag and provide us with the possibility of playable and enjoyable huuuge fleetfights, you can remove Deep Saves! Until then (2025) let them be a tactical possibility to enter a system.
|
TheBlueMonkey
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:08:00 -
[59]
Removal in this fasion is balls.
Give people a way of finding them instead.
Add more content not remove existing ftw --
Nothing is worthless, you may have gotten it for free but it still has an inherent value
|
Frank Fearless
|
Posted - 2010.04.13 13:09:00 -
[60]
Whoever came up with the idea to remove deep space safes has never fought in a large fleet battle or tried to attack/defend a system. It displays utter lack of gameplay knowledge.
With the removal of this tactical possibility CCP is in fact reducing the possibility of fleetfights to a grinding stop. Instead we will get a "Maginot Line" of entrenched troups following the motto "he, who is first in a system, wins". Jumping into a system with 300+ enemies waiting at the incoming gate is garanteed suicide. It is possible to even stress the node further by artificially creating lag (I could spawn like 6 trial accounts on various computer and have them do silly stuff just to keep the server running at it's maximum speed).
So you either remove lag (or whatever it is called) and guarantee that the extermination of whole fleets due to gridload issue will not happen anymore ("our logs show nothing - REALLY!!"), or you provide some means to circumvent it.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |