EVE Search - Is there anything that you would change about the mechanics of EVE?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Is there anything that you would change about the mechanics of EVE?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ira Theos	Posted - 2010.10.04 14:52:00 - [61] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Ira Theos THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch. Why don't people like you spend more time in the ideas section? ************************** I did years ago, but I learned that most of the other players just want to play "Spawn Camping Online" rather than making the game more strategically and tactically interesting. You know you have to keep your priorities straight... first order of business is protecting the old zero alliance's time-ingrained turf advantage firmly cemented so their leadership can continue to enjoy free game time via GTCs and ships paid for by the moon goo and the labor of the serfs of the general alliance membership. Everything else, like real strategic or tactical game improvements are entirely secondary. So relax and enjoy the game.
Dr Fighter	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:01:00 - [62] Originally by: Usul Atreides Originally by: Tarin Majagh Make it so that a single frigate with a cyno cannot call on 20+ supercaps. Each supercap requires a full uncontested cyno cycle to jump. That...that actually sounds reasonable. yeah and hows this: Give the cyno a dedicated MASS allowence like WH do upto 1 super.
Ben Derindar Dirty Deeds Corp.	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:03:00 - [63] Nerf all forms of fast long distance travel: capital ship jump ranges, jump bridge networks, jump clones etc. And keep nerfing it until smaller parties have a chance of establishing themselves in 0.0 without (a) having to pay rent to powerblock X, or (b) being curbstomped by powerblock Y within days for no other reason than to pad their precious killboard stats and/or simply "teh lulz". /Ben
Ira Theos	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:05:00 - [64] Originally by: Orange Lagomorph Originally by: Alyth Originally by: Rob Stager how many times outside of wars did you get blown up right after you undocked in high-sec? sure there's risks but 0.001% risk is better than 50% don't you think? About as often as I did in my home space in when I was living in 0.0, which is to say nearly never because of defence gangs, POS to flee to. watching local etc. Removal of CONCORD would make people gankhappy for a while, sure, but when they figure out they can't get stuff done it'll end up being policed by players anyhow. Problem: We need an area of space that isn't governed by someone's juvenile nerd clique. In other words, we need an area of neutrality that is also somewhat safe. Player policing actually sounds good to me, because the corruption and payola would be hilarious, but it would be bad for the game. ***************************** Quoting you..."Player policing actually sounds good to me, because the corruption and payola would be hilarious,.." You need to move out here to zero now... what are you waiting for?
knobber Jobbler Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:07:00 - [65] -Remove learning skills -Ability to warp to any point in a system -Removal of gates as exit points i.e. when an 'out' gate warps you, it send you to the edge of a system, not the gate the other side. -Insurance for people killed by concorde (really not sure why this has never been done) -Ability for FC's to control fleet speed and navigation including preset tactical formations i.e. press a button and fleet forms into a formation.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:19:00 - [66] Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 04/10/2010 15:24:53 Originally by: Ira Theos Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Ira Theos THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch. Why don't people like you spend more time in the ideas section? ************************ I did years ago, but I learned that most of the other players just want to play "Spawn Camping Online" rather than making the game more strategically and tactically interesting. You know you have to keep your priorities straight... first order of business is protecting the old zero alliance's time-ingrained turf advantage firmly cemented so their leadership can continue to enjoy free game time via GTCs and ships paid for by the moon goo and the labor of the serfs of the general alliance membership. Everything else, like real strategic or tactical game improvements are entirely secondary. So relax and enjoy the game. Well the good news is the idea is gaining more momentum here at least, which means it's probably been read by a Dev or two and considered. For a long time i was a lone voice in many threads here. In my ideas thread i offered the idea of removing gates and bringing in a new travel method to make PvP more dynamic just because i think it's something which would enrich the game, and welcomed people to tweak my details as much as they please, so it would be a bit hypocritical to claim all variants as mine now. The important thing is that it happens someday. As long as someone doesn't go slapping their name on it and taking all** the credit, which i suspect happened with a bounty system change i mentioned here long ago, it's cool. I don't think people always knowingly 'steal' ideas, but sometimes things they hear in the past floats in the subconscious for awhile, then surfaces with no remembered point of origin. Any community suggested changes should be treated as a group effort just to be safe. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Barakkus Syndicate Asset Management	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:51:00 - [67] Originally by: knobber Jobbler -Removal of gates as exit points i.e. when an 'out' gate warps you, it send you to the edge of a system, not the gate the other side. Any random spot in the system you jump into would be awesome actually. I have to agree, Gatecamp Online is kinda lame. Originally by: captain foivos Who would recruit someone named Barakkus? Wait a minute...
Ira Theos	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:52:00 - [68] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 04/10/2010 15:35:19 Originally by: Ira Theos Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Ira Theos THIS... Give this man a reward. He understands the problem. Make it so next patch. Why don't people like you spend more time in the ideas section? ************************ I did years ago, but I learned that most of the other players just want to play "Spawn Camping Online" rather than making the game more strategically and tactically interesting. You know you have to keep your priorities straight... first order of business is protecting the old zero alliance's time-ingrained turf advantage firmly cemented so their leadership can continue to enjoy free game time via GTCs and ships paid for by the moon goo and the labor of the serfs of the general alliance membership. Everything else, like real strategic or tactical game improvements are entirely secondary. So relax and enjoy the game. Well the good news is the idea is gaining more momentum here at least, which means it's probably been read by a Dev or two and considered. For a long time i was a lone voice in many threads here. In my ideas thread i offered the idea of removing gates and bringing in a new travel method to make PvP more dynamic just because i think it's something which would enrich the game. I welcomed people to tweak my details as much as they please and just left the idea there "for posterity", so it would be a bit hypocritical to claim all variants as mine now. The important thing is that it happens someday. As long as someone doesn't go slapping their name on it and taking all the credit, which i suspect happened with a bounty system change i mentioned here long ago, it's cool. I don't think people always knowingly 'steal' ideas, but sometimes things they hear in the past float in the subconscious for awhile, then surface with no remembered point of origin. Any community suggested changes should be treated as a group effort just to be safe. ******************* No, nothing's changed... and neither you nor I are especially creative in our suggestion. We were merely one more nerd in a long line of nerds that felt the obvious need for changing the game from "Whack-A-Mole" to something requiring a bit of thought.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:56:00 - [69] Edited by: Professor Tarantula on 04/10/2010 16:05:22 Originally by: Ira Theos No, nothing's changed... and neither you nor I are especially creative in our suggestion. We were merely one more nerd in a long line of nerds that felt the obvious need for changing the game from "Whack-A-Mole" to something requiring a bit of thought. You really haven't heard my suggestion in its entirety, even made a story around it which was pretty creative imo, but that's ok. I spent a long time just mentioning it here before i got around to making that thread in ideas, which elaborated on it quite a bit, and anyone who's been here awhile knows it's something i've talked about a lot over the last couple years. Like i said, though, it doesn't matter to me if everyone thinks i started it or not, as long as it happens. I can remember when even mentioning the removal of gatecamps got me shouted down, and that doesn't happen anymore, which is a good thing. My Warmest Regards. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Ehranavaar	Posted - 2010.10.04 15:59:00 - [70] be pretty nice if missiles attacked from whatever direction they approached from instead of waiting for the target to pass then tail chasing it down. then target speed effects would be variable rather than always optimized for the target's benefit. be pretty funny to watch some 6km/second inty plow head on into a missile salvo adding to the damage.

Tarin Majagh Caldari Eclipse Industrials Quantum Forge	Posted - 2010.10.04 20:13:00 - [71] Originally by: Dr Fighter Originally by: Usul Atreides Originally by: Tarin Majagh Make it so that a single frigate with a cyno cannot call on 20+ supercaps. Each supercap requires a full uncontested cyno cycle to jump. That...that actually sounds reasonable. yeah and hows this: Give the cyno a dedicated MASS allowence like WH do upto 1 super. Right. This was basically the thought process I was having. Different sized Cyno modules = more mass per cycle. -- Quantum Forge
Terbulus	Posted - 2010.10.04 20:50:00 - [72] give me the ability to steer my ship, rather than just double clicking in the general direction I want to go. I want to do a barrel roll.
Syn Callibri Minmatar 21st Eridani Lighthorse	Posted - 2010.10.04 21:14:00 - [73] Edited by: Syn Callibri on 04/10/2010 21:18:32 Collisions that do damage or damage from exploding ships. ...RAMMING SPEED! Syn Callibri Commander - Fleet Ops [21EL] Keeper of the Blood Pact
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.10.05 05:59:00 - [74] Originally by: Syn Callibri Edited by: Syn Callibri on 04/10/2010 21:18:32 Collisions that do damage or damage from exploding ships. ...RAMMING SPEED! A maneuver bound to be most popular with the Thorax. Sorry, couldn't help it.
Kezzle	Posted - 2010.10.05 10:50:00 - [75] Originally by: knobber Jobbler -Remove learning skills I like the general idea of removing the need to choose whether you have increases in fun potential at the beginning of the game, or hit an efficient progression rate early on, but having a way to add 50% (I'm counting implants) to your training speed (or more, if it's off-attributemap skills you're learning) is, I think, valuable. I'd remove the learning skills, refund the SP spent and replace them with an automatic equivalent increase in attributes over time. Quote: -Removal of gates as exit points i.e. when an 'out' gate warps you, it send you to the edge of a system, not the gate the other side. This is a great idea. Means you don't need to add any capabilities to ship hulls, or change the jump map, but means that defending a system doesn't just require holding one or two choke points. Would need a Fleet "Jump to" command, perhaps which would drop the cooperating fleet in a tighter group than random scatter throughout the target system. Or maybe that wouldn't be possible and the attacking disadvantage would be that your ships stood a good chance of arriving outside mutual support range, and the defenders might have a chance of defeating at least some of the attackers in detail before they could group up. Quote: -Insurance for people killed by concorde (really not sure why this has never been done) Again, insurance for criminals, or self-destruction makes no sense. The argument about whether it'll do anything to curtail suicide ganks or insurance fraud is irrelevant: it's just a wierd concept that should go away. Quote: -Ability for FC's to control fleet speed and navigation including preset tactical formations i.e. press a button and fleet forms into a formation. Kinda. Such things should come with practice. It should be possible to send a coordinate in a formation to another ship for that ship's captain to then fly to. Speed should be settable in the UI by typing a number rather than fiddling about with arrows on a dial.
Galphram NefreX	Posted - 2010.10.05 11:24:00 - [76] Edited by: Galphram NefreX on 05/10/2010 11:25:40 Warp to 0 with autopilot please. I hate hauling and autopilot warping to 15km all the time :(
UberRat	Posted - 2010.10.05 19:42:00 - [77] Originally by: Mardero I want to be able to navigate my ship with WASD. Also phpBB3 for the forums ftw. +1 From me; as well as a big red LED telling me when I'm being scrambled and webbed
Amarok Tonrar Dark Shadow Industries	Posted - 2010.10.05 20:13:00 - [78] 1. Remove local. Talk to any WH dweller and they'll tell you, it really does add to the feeling of being in deep space. 2. Remove stargates! I love the idea of jumping to a system and randomly landing within the system. You can even use the same icons on the overview to lock your ships computer onto and jump. However, say it takes...30 seconds to lock on and jump? And of course the ship has to align towards desired star system. For the Eve lore, you can just say scientists figured out how to jump to a nearby star system by locking onto the star itself. With the development of frigate sized jump drives, stargates become obsolete and now over-run by pirates. Capitals can make the same jumps, but with a cyno ship, are able to jump much further. 3. Divide the four NPC empires with wide swathes of low sec! It would create a more diverse market. Would also make routes through low sec much more interesting as people would actually be forced to travel through lowsec if they want to get to another market or missioning area. It would make being whatever race you are much more interesting and more meaningful.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.05 21:13:00 - [79] Originally by: Tarin Majagh Make it so that a single frigate with a cyno cannot call on 20+ supercaps. Each supercap requires a full uncontested cyno cycle to jump. Best idea in this entire thread. Better than all of mine, certainly.
Aylara	Posted - 2010.10.05 21:20:00 - [80] Old ideea: line of sight for firing weapons; fights will become more tactical, weapons like drones and missiles would be very special, less blobbing.

Tuurducken	Posted - 2010.10.05 22:26:00 - [81] If you removed gates from Eve, how would you ever find any PvP at all that wasn't a gigantic sov clusterfudge involving camping a POS or some such? The game actually needs chokepoints. Otherwise, you'd never be able to find anyone to kill.
Grytok KL0NKRIEGER	Posted - 2010.10.05 22:44:00 - [82] Originally by: Tuurducken If you removed gates from Eve, how would you ever find any PvP at all that wasn't a gigantic sov clusterfudge involving camping a POS or some such? The game actually needs chokepoints. Otherwise, you'd never be able to find anyone to kill. Asteroid belts and mission-sites are the place you usually find targets while roaming. Gatecamping is for wussies and people to incompetent to use the directional scanner and/or a probe-launcher. Additionally, if you do away with the local-chat, then people wouldn't instantly warp to their POS once you enter the system. That's why there's actually quiet some fun PvP happening in wormholes.
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles	Posted - 2010.10.05 22:58:00 - [83] Windows, so people can see what's happening outside the stations that they're docked in. --- 34.4:1 mineral compression
Cors Trap Standings Inc	Posted - 2010.10.05 23:20:00 - [84] game mechanic changes.. -Cloaks would use energy and only last 15 min at a time, then need at least 5 min to cool down. - Ships would do damage based on class. Same class, 100% damage. One class up/down, -50% damage.(Class's being, Frigs, Cruisers, BC's, BS's, Capitals, Super Caps, and so on) 2 Class's up/down, -90% damage. This would make it so that a gang of cruisers would have a near impossible time taking out capitals/super caps and capitals would have almost no effect on anything smaller then a BC. Fleets would actually NEED people of other ship classes. No more BS only fleets. No more Cap only fleets. -SOV. Make SOV be tied to distance/jumps from your capital. EG: You have a system that is 5 jumps from your capital, then all sytstems between MUST be SOV 4 before you can get SOV in the system. The idea is then you'd not have Alliance's claiming sov over dozens/hundreds of systems, or, if they DO, then they are vulnerable to attack in the middle systems. If a hostile force takes over sov in a middle system, you have 3 days to regain sov, or you loose it in all the outlying systems. Make is so that "Core" sytems of an alliance are "closed". Meaning they can be set to not allow anyone who's not + to the alliance into them. Give 0.0 alliance's a way to "lock down" a Core system, or even constellation if they've had sov long enough in EVERY system in that constellation. To keep those systems locked down to hostiles, they'd have to keep SOV 4 in ALL the adjoining systems. This would make hostiles have to attack your outlying systems to be able to attack your core systems. This would also make a LOT more "carebears" move to 0.0. And no matter how you look at it, more people in 0.0 is better then more people in highsec.
Orange Lagomorph	Posted - 2010.10.05 23:22:00 - [85] Originally by: Cors game mechanic changes.. -Cloaks would use energy and only last 15 min at a time, then need at least 5 min to cool down. Toss another one onto the AFK cloaker whine pile.
Adunh Slavy	Posted - 2010.10.06 10:11:00 - [86] Originally by: Tuurducken If you removed gates from Eve, how would you ever find any PvP at all that wasn't a gigantic sov clusterfudge involving camping a POS or some such? The game actually needs chokepoints. Otherwise, you'd never be able to find anyone to kill. You don't need choke points if there is another mechanism players can use to find one another. Just for a moment imagine if the directional scanner could give a warpable result. Short version is: Wide scans at long ranges have a large deviation, more narrow focus and shorter ranges have less deviation. Think submarines and sonar. The Real Space Initiative - V6 (Forum Link)
ZenSun Total Mayhem. Northern Coalition.	Posted - 2010.10.06 11:02:00 - [87] Frigate sized hulls being able to speed tank low sec gate guns, change tracking speed on the sentry guns.
Forum Guy	Posted - 2010.10.06 11:54:00 - [88] Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Originally by: Professor Tarantula Originally by: Tippia Less protection in highsec. Yeah, that would be a fun month for a few people, then it would be as empty as lowsec and CCPs revenue would plummet. Try to think of ideas that don't kill the game. Mine would be removing gates and developing a new means of travel that doesn't create bottenecks, which would result in more people entering lowsec. +1 I posted a similar idea before for no gates but sub jump drive different from the cap jump drive that would enable small ships to hop system to system and appear at random spots at the system. Though expect many ppl to be with or against this idea +1 Great idea, even better it'll make those gate campers have to work for a living for a change.
Amberlamps	Posted - 2010.10.06 11:58:00 - [89] Fix the annoying shield bug when receiving bonuses from fleet or fitting in space Or give shields equal resists and more buffs
Salria Usenheart Caldari	Posted - 2010.10.06 12:49:00 - [90] You know gates used to dump you anywhere in a system... They already removed that mechanic.



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.