| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Reptar
   |
Posted - 2004.12.20 01:46:00 -
[151]
And dont forget a Search function for your assets,
See Link in my Siggy Below
|
Reptar
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 01:46:00 -
[152]
And dont forget a Search function for your assets,
See Link in my Siggy Below
|
Hawk Firestorm
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 09:00:00 -
[153]
If they are actually seriously considering puttin in point defence, I give it a BIG thumbs up.
Not suprising cos I'm one of the ones that sugested it. hehe
Point defence wouldn't make ya raven pointless, it would however add a great dynamic to the game and bring in some tactics, where ships like escorts could be used as a naval screen as is in real life.
Just because point defence maybe commin in doesn't mean it's going to be 100% effective you know.
Ya there's many goof ups with the current games balance, and hopefully the will get addressed if the devs do the ground work first.
But who knows.
|
Hawk Firestorm
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 09:00:00 -
[154]
If they are actually seriously considering puttin in point defence, I give it a BIG thumbs up.
Not suprising cos I'm one of the ones that sugested it. hehe
Point defence wouldn't make ya raven pointless, it would however add a great dynamic to the game and bring in some tactics, where ships like escorts could be used as a naval screen as is in real life.
Just because point defence maybe commin in doesn't mean it's going to be 100% effective you know.
Ya there's many goof ups with the current games balance, and hopefully the will get addressed if the devs do the ground work first.
But who knows.
|
ace
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 12:26:00 -
[155]
I would like more CCP action :- at the moment they circle around gates and stations quite merrily and seem very inert, it would be good if all of a sudden they would attack an npc drug runner or a wanted npc charectar and maybe from the destruction drop a bit of loot. This would make them seem more interactive with the game and would give us some action to watch ocasionally
|
ace
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 12:26:00 -
[156]
I would like more CCP action :- at the moment they circle around gates and stations quite merrily and seem very inert, it would be good if all of a sudden they would attack an npc drug runner or a wanted npc charectar and maybe from the destruction drop a bit of loot. This would make them seem more interactive with the game and would give us some action to watch ocasionally
|
Iratus Caelestis
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 13:33:00 -
[157]
Excellent.
Can you please make tab switch targets again though, its a pain in the arse as it makes it much more difficult to cycle jam or kill drones.
|
Iratus Caelestis
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 13:33:00 -
[158]
Excellent.
Can you please make tab switch targets again though, its a pain in the arse as it makes it much more difficult to cycle jam or kill drones.
|
1FSTCAT
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:22:00 -
[159]
why not allow the auto targetter to target them again
so you can shoot down the missiles move it to the low slot if it takes up a too precious high slot
|
1FSTCAT
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:22:00 -
[160]
why not allow the auto targetter to target them again
so you can shoot down the missiles move it to the low slot if it takes up a too precious high slot
|
Reptar
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:42:00 -
[161]
Another problem is the placement of the ;
"Lock Target" and "Start Conversation" buttons in the "Selected Item" section of your overview (Thats the box in the very very top right hand side).
In lagtastic battles, when people start double click things due to lag and the "Lock Target" button disappears and turns into the "Start Conversation" button this makes them Lock me and Start a Conversation.
The problem is worse for people like myself who turn off CSPA charges so they do not get a warning before they start the convo.
|
Reptar
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:42:00 -
[162]
Another problem is the placement of the ;
"Lock Target" and "Start Conversation" buttons in the "Selected Item" section of your overview (Thats the box in the very very top right hand side).
In lagtastic battles, when people start double click things due to lag and the "Lock Target" button disappears and turns into the "Start Conversation" button this makes them Lock me and Start a Conversation.
The problem is worse for people like myself who turn off CSPA charges so they do not get a warning before they start the convo.
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:54:00 -
[163]
If at all possible, the menu options available on Overview should be different from those in midspace or in local.
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:54:00 -
[164]
If at all possible, the menu options available on Overview should be different from those in midspace or in local.
[Heterocephalus glaber]
|
Jin Entres
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:58:00 -
[165]
The point defense gun sounds interesting and could contribute to the specialization element. To do this, however, it would need to have a major drawback. Perhaps a huge cap drain or penalty of some kind? This way, using one would be efficient if you knew who you were fighting but not an easy good-to-have-with-you-at-all-times thingy.
Predicting the change in balance should a pdg be introduced as an additional defense against missiles (leaving other weaponry untampered), I think this situation would just turn around creating the same kind of whine about turrets being overpowered. Not to mention changes in tracking system.
People not using missiles may be at a disadvantage without some modifications but keep in mind it is balance we seek, not the preferance of our own choices.
There should always be advantages as well as disadvantages to using any weaponry over another.
|
Jin Entres
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 14:58:00 -
[166]
The point defense gun sounds interesting and could contribute to the specialization element. To do this, however, it would need to have a major drawback. Perhaps a huge cap drain or penalty of some kind? This way, using one would be efficient if you knew who you were fighting but not an easy good-to-have-with-you-at-all-times thingy.
Predicting the change in balance should a pdg be introduced as an additional defense against missiles (leaving other weaponry untampered), I think this situation would just turn around creating the same kind of whine about turrets being overpowered. Not to mention changes in tracking system.
People not using missiles may be at a disadvantage without some modifications but keep in mind it is balance we seek, not the preferance of our own choices.
There should always be advantages as well as disadvantages to using any weaponry over another.
|
Oveur
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 15:24:00 -
[167]
 Originally by: Archbishop
Oveur don't forget the consensual wars!!!!!
Archbishop 
I won't.
Point Defense systems is a whole different thing though, not quite on the agenda yet. The current design is based on optimal usage by a Point Defense Cruiser, a TL2 ship, while other ships would be able to use lesser variants of Point Defnse systems.
_____________________________
I say hey sky, s'other say I won say, I pray to J I get the same ol' same ol. |
Oveur
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 15:24:00 -
[168]
Originally by: Archbishop
Oveur don't forget the consensual wars!!!!!
Archbishop
I won't.
Point Defense systems is a whole different thing though, not quite on the agenda yet. The current design is based on optimal usage by a Point Defense Cruiser, a TL2 ship, while other ships would be able to use lesser variants of Point Defnse systems.
_____________________________
I say hey sky, s'other say I won say, I pray to J I get the same ol' same ol. |
Laendra
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 15:39:00 -
[169]
How about nerfing the Line Of Sight moon survey probe launching?
------------------- |
Laendra
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 15:39:00 -
[170]
How about nerfing the Line Of Sight moon survey probe launching?
------------------- |
flummox
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 18:23:00 -
[171]
Originally by: Oveur
TL2 Ammo is also on the agenda. I just didn't list it because we're nearly done with them.
yes!
i'm gonna go make a snow angel...
there is a fine, but dissasterous line between a fart and a shart. i suggest you make sure which side you want to be on... |
flummox
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 18:23:00 -
[172]
Originally by: Oveur
TL2 Ammo is also on the agenda. I just didn't list it because we're nearly done with them.
yes!
i'm gonna go make a snow angel...
there is a fine, but dissasterous line between a fart and a shart. i suggest you make sure which side you want to be on... |
flummox
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 18:25:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Archbishop
Oveur don't forget the consensual wars!!!!!
Archbishop
what about Sensual Wars? any word on these yet? 
there is a fine, but dissasterous line between a fart and a shart. i suggest you make sure which side you want to be on... |
flummox
|
Posted - 2004.12.20 18:25:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Archbishop
Oveur don't forget the consensual wars!!!!!
Archbishop
what about Sensual Wars? any word on these yet?
there is a fine, but dissasterous line between a fart and a shart. i suggest you make sure which side you want to be on... |
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 05:00:00 -
[175]
Missile Overhaul
- EW Overhaul
- Fix some of the projectile turrets
- Tech Level 2 Missiles, Launchers, Drones and EW.
- Increased Hitpoints on all ships
- Tech Level 2 ships and tweaks to them
great, there gose my raven and any lesser skilled players being able too compet in combat up against higher skilled players when they nerf ew too death.
ew dose not need a overhaul nor dose missiles all that much.
its the time of the apoc.
im only gona pay month by month now and wait.
|
OffBeaT
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 05:00:00 -
[176]
Missile Overhaul
- EW Overhaul
- Fix some of the projectile turrets
- Tech Level 2 Missiles, Launchers, Drones and EW.
- Increased Hitpoints on all ships
- Tech Level 2 ships and tweaks to them
great, there gose my raven and any lesser skilled players being able too compet in combat up against higher skilled players when they nerf ew too death.
ew dose not need a overhaul nor dose missiles all that much.
its the time of the apoc.
im only gona pay month by month now and wait.
|
Damajink
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:12:00 -
[177]
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Discorporation
Have you decided on how to modify missiles yet?
Nope, we have some ideas. If you have a suggestion, a well formed game design post in the Ships & Module forum or Idea lab is appreciated. You can reply to this thread with links to your previous suggestions too, that will help us take them into consideration.
TomB's idea from a while back about missiles doing less damage to smaller targets as they increase in size would work best with the AB/MWD nerf in my opinion.
|
Damajink
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 15:12:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Oveur
Originally by: Discorporation
Have you decided on how to modify missiles yet?
Nope, we have some ideas. If you have a suggestion, a well formed game design post in the Ships & Module forum or Idea lab is appreciated. You can reply to this thread with links to your previous suggestions too, that will help us take them into consideration.
TomB's idea from a while back about missiles doing less damage to smaller targets as they increase in size would work best with the AB/MWD nerf in my opinion.
|
Percivs
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:10:00 -
[179]
Edited by: Percivs on 21/12/2004 22:05:20
Originally by: Hawk Firestorm
Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 19/12/2004 09:11:23
Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 19/12/2004 09:02:45
I have to say mate that overall the new tracking system isn't working out.
It's complex and difficult for many to understand never mind use transversal, doesn't offer simple point and shoot with simple dmg calculations that still simulate a random element to gunery.
.
.
.
One of the major reasons why I think you get so many posts about omg you did this and you did that is because at the moment as soon as you try to balance one thing it pushes something else out, which to me just emphasises my point.
.
.
.
The economy needs alot of attention too, esecially measures to try make corps have a greater role on the economy, and creating a fabric where allainces produce certain items where wars etc have a impact on trade etc.
Where as now ya just can't 'conquer' territory as such or have much of a impact on your nme on a basic level other than blowing up ships.
.
.
.
You make an excellent point. Sometimes enhanced 'reality' does not make for a better gaming experience. Complexity inversely affects ease of use (that is: The more complex the system you model, the harder it is to use the model in a simple manner.)
Still, the one thing that I love most about Eve is that no matter how frustrating some of the dev decisions are, and how many complaints I might have about this or that portion of the game, I recognize one valuable truth about Eve (and yes, this is a truth):
Eve, due to it's complexity, is evolving based on player behavior more than by the design of the devs.
As you point out, nerf this, now they have to boost that and the other thing. Boost that, then this and this needs to be nerfed. It will always be a balancing act.
[OT] I'm not particularly thrilled with the initial proposal for the HP increase, but over all it is a good idea. I've seen what the introduction of TL2 Assault Cruisers do to TL1 Battleships. It's scary how dangerous a TL2 Cruiser is against a TL1 Battleship 1v1. Someone I know was reading the logs of an Apoc getting Wrecking hits on his TL2 Cruiser, and they were only doing 50+ dmg. TL1 BS need to still be competative with TL2 Cruisers, and presently, they're not. [/OT]
Edit: Typo's
---
"All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field" - A.E. |
Percivs
|
Posted - 2004.12.21 21:10:00 -
[180]
Edited by: Percivs on 21/12/2004 22:05:20
Originally by: Hawk Firestorm
Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 19/12/2004 09:11:23
Edited by: Hawk Firestorm on 19/12/2004 09:02:45
I have to say mate that overall the new tracking system isn't working out.
It's complex and difficult for many to understand never mind use transversal, doesn't offer simple point and shoot with simple dmg calculations that still simulate a random element to gunery.
.
.
.
One of the major reasons why I think you get so many posts about omg you did this and you did that is because at the moment as soon as you try to balance one thing it pushes something else out, which to me just emphasises my point.
.
.
.
The economy needs alot of attention too, esecially measures to try make corps have a greater role on the economy, and creating a fabric where allainces produce certain items where wars etc have a impact on trade etc.
Where as now ya just can't 'conquer' territory as such or have much of a impact on your nme on a basic level other than blowing up ships.
.
.
.
You make an excellent point. Sometimes enhanced 'reality' does not make for a better gaming experience. Complexity inversely affects ease of use (that is: The more complex the system you model, the harder it is to use the model in a simple manner.)
Still, the one thing that I love most about Eve is that no matter how frustrating some of the dev decisions are, and how many complaints I might have about this or that portion of the game, I recognize one valuable truth about Eve (and yes, this is a truth):
Eve, due to it's complexity, is evolving based on player behavior more than by the design of the devs.
As you point out, nerf this, now they have to boost that and the other thing. Boost that, then this and this needs to be nerfed. It will always be a balancing act.
[OT] I'm not particularly thrilled with the initial proposal for the HP increase, but over all it is a good idea. I've seen what the introduction of TL2 Assault Cruisers do to TL1 Battleships. It's scary how dangerous a TL2 Cruiser is against a TL1 Battleship 1v1. Someone I know was reading the logs of an Apoc getting Wrecking hits on his TL2 Cruiser, and they were only doing 50+ dmg. TL1 BS need to still be competative with TL2 Cruisers, and presently, they're not. [/OT]
Edit: Typo's
---
"All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field" - A.E. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |