Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |

Tsubutai
The Tuskers
105
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:31:00 -
[61] - Quote
Karl Planck wrote:woa woa woa, what the F*CK is this Quote:CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out. I AM PLEADING with you, don't do this. This will absolutely murder lowsec. Not liking LOWSEC gate camps is one thing (nullsec is apparently fine to camp) , but enabling fast tackle on any gate in lowsec is going to put a absolute stop to the traffic that exists there now. And this wont even stop camps (as i assume this is the intention of the change). All it will promote is the time honored tradition of bouncing. How does this work with cycling between targets? I'd like to strongly echo these concerns, albeit for slightly different reasons. To drop a triage carrier in under 5 minutes, you're looking at 3-4k+ dps. If that's applied in the same way that current sentry damage is (i.e. perfect tracking, full damage anywhere within 150 km of the gate), it basically makes it impossible to have any kind of extended small-scale gang engagement on a lowsec gate outside of FW since such fights generally require one side or the other to take GCC, and that's far too much extra dps to cope with on that scale when you can't mitigate it through range/tracking. As Karl notes, it would have basically no effect on gatecampers since they'll just chill at off-grid safes between ganks, but it'd cripple small-scale roaming pvp. |

Kethry Avenger
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
25
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:40:00 -
[62] - Quote
It feels like I just read a book.
I like both styles. The expanded with quotes and the more straight transcript both are way better than the older minutes. |

Ethilia
Freelance Excavation and Resistance Apocalypse Now.
25
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:47:00 -
[63] - Quote
Where are the summaries???! I don't have time to read 5 million pages of geek chat. |

MotherMoon
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
1055
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:47:00 -
[64] - Quote
"Seleene exercised his chairmanly powers, declared the topic beaten to death"
xD
Ethilia wrote:Where are the summaries???! I don't have time to read 5 million pages of geek chat.
the basic ones were released months ago.
and if you don't have the time to read it then HTFU you know, or just wait for someone to do it. Someone does every year, even when it was shorter. http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg |

Seleene
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1845
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:55:00 -
[65] - Quote
Ethilia wrote:Where are the summaries???! I don't have time to read 5 million pages of geek chat.
What you are asking for is essentially here and here. I had those out within two weeks of the Summit concluding. I spent about 2 days on each of those blogs, watching the recordings of all the sessions and shooting for something that would at least let people know the basics of what was covered in each session. Even then, I hit damn near 12k words myself in those two blogs. If folks don't want to comb through the official minutes, they can read those blogs and still get a general idea of what we did.  CSM 7 Chairman My Blog - Where I say stuff Follow Seleene on Twitter! |

Ravcharas
GREY COUNCIL Nulli Secunda
177
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 19:55:00 -
[66] - Quote
Quote:Seleene commented, at this time in the discussion, that he was still waiting for the GÇÿmoney-shotGÇÖ, what about Technetium, POSes, sovereignty? CCP SoundwaveGÇÖs reply was that these topics were not on the schedule for the Winter 2012 release, but they would be covered in more detail in the next session about EVE Future, i.e. the release/s beyond Winter 2012.

And that's all I have to say about that.
Quote:CCP Ytterbium continued on the Frigate path and stated that he believed AF, Interceptors, Covert Ops, and Bombers were all well balanced, to which there were no disagreements. The combat interceptors could maybe use some attention.
Quote:Summarizing the meeting, CCP Xhagen asked the CSM what they thought of the general plan that CCP Ytterbium laid out, and asked CCP Ytterbium and CCP Soundwave what their timeframe for implementing these changes was. Was the bolded question answered somewhere, or am I just blind? |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
238
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:27:00 -
[67] - Quote
Some interesting stuff in there. POS equipped with jumpdrives would be amazing, seriously! Don't dismiss this idea.
As Amarr specialized pilot, I also feel the need to provide some feedback about the ideas that were brought up.
1) I agree that there should be a T1 HAM ship that serves as stepping stone to the Sacrilege. I believe this ship should be the Prophecy so that the Maller can be the mini-Abaddon and the Omen the mini-Zealot. The Arbitrator is ideally suited to be the T1 Amarr cruiser with launcher hardpoints because unbonused HAM/Heavy Missiles work better than unbonused lasers. The HAMs compliment close-ranged energu neuting based fits, while Heavy Missiles have the range to compliment TD fits.
In my opinion, this distribution of weapon systems makes the most sense.
2) I'm skeptical about a drone-based destroyer because destroyer hulls are fragile and fights with them are short. Yet drones rarely make for fast fights, this conflicts with the philosophy of destroyer hulls. I would honestly rather see a rocket destroyer, or one with bonuses to energy neutralizers.
3) I was disappointed to not see any discussion about the controversial -10% laser cap usage bonus. Replacing this bonus on more and more ships with a 5% damage bonus is essentially the admission that it's not working as intended and should be looked at as a whole. An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:35:00 -
[68] - Quote
currently page 78, UI pannel.
liked a lot the "who said what", and I must say that the POS and UI ideas are full of win. hope it'll become reality soon :)
also you really trolled us on incarna, not saying anything about what csm saw |

Seleene
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1845
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:44:00 -
[69] - Quote
Tanaka Aiko wrote:also you really trolled us on incarna, not saying anything about what csm saw
Yeah, I'm not too happy about that but we'll see what can be said in the near future. CSM 7 Chairman My Blog - Where I say stuff Follow Seleene on Twitter! |

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy Tactical Narcotics Team
174
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:50:00 -
[70] - Quote
Thank you for a good read - I would really really love to get a more compressed version though even if I migh lose funny details...
About logistics: Logistic ships are super important for large fleets, however they currently are a bit too tricky to counter for small scale fleets... Basically you need your own because ewar and raw dps cannot reliably counter logistics...
Perhaps CCP should work out a system to make all sizes important: make small shield transporters, remote reppers and cap transfers have the longest range/smallest amount make large shield transporters, remote reppers and cap transfers have the shortest range/highest amount make medium shield transporters, remote reppers and cap transfers have stats between the other sizes
This pulls heavy repping logis closer to fleet, but they can help tacklers further out if fit for it. IMO 72km is fine for small modules but not for the heavy modules. Especially when logistics are capable of easily remote repairing eachother with a strong effect
Pinky Denmark
PS. Tier 3 made sniping viable again, but plz nerf scan resolution, remove Talos drone bay and remove that 1 turret as suggested. People only defend them because they like to use them as they are right now... |
|

Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:56:00 -
[71] - Quote
Seleene wrote:Tanaka Aiko wrote:also you really trolled us on incarna, not saying anything about what csm saw Yeah, I'm not too happy about that but we'll see what can be said in the near future. what's really strange is that for incarna we have "NDA sorry", while for POS we have "warning ! this is only ideas from what may or may not happen. i repeat : this may NOT happen at all. to be sure you understand : these are just ideas, not facts."
hey CCP, if you want i'll clic on a TOS like UI to be able to read the incarna thing :P
what's more strange is that for the UI pannel, where I'm pretty sure most of the stuff is also on early stages, there's nothing saying it is that. so for 3 differents pannels we have totally differents things regarding NDA and early concepts :/
well anyway, i'm at 83/165, and if i was really disapointed seing only 2 pages for winter 2012 after 30 for csm whitepaper (that have not much importance for us who'll never be candidates), i'm really pleased with what i read on the UI, while i wasn't hoping for anything here.
also, it seems xhagen is pretty obsessed by his mates scared by losing their jobs to csm mistakes, while two step was in full bittervet mode xD
ps : on the "Present:" line you only tell the special guests, nowhere is listed the main cast :/
pps : time for a break, i'm not a native english speaker and this was a bit too much for me. i'll read the other half later. |

Jupix
Stargate Systems Zombie Ninja Space Bears
22
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 20:57:00 -
[72] - Quote
Thank you for an exhaustive document. I'm in the process of reading but at p. 84 I'm running out of Thursday...
I really like the long formats. I read transcripts of TV shows too, so I'm very much at home with that format. The elongated minutes are fine too. If I got to choose, I'd take the transcript version for everything. I really appreciate the little tidbits of humor as well. Add flavor to an otherwise lengthy and dry document.
As an aside:
Quote:CCP Arrow also noted that they had been watching video footage of planes that were in the process of crashing, and gaining inspiration from actual cockpit indicators that assisted pilots during an emergency and seeing how they transitioned into a state where essentially all they were doing was telling you that you were about to die.
Link to vid?  Also, I fail ! |

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:03:00 -
[73] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium: GÇ¥Something I really don't like in Factional Warfare, is just the capital hot drop. To me it has nothing to do with what Factional Warfare is supposed to do.GÇ¥ Elise: GÇ£Well I don't know, triages are pretty cool small gang PvP thing.GÇ¥
I lol'ed. Hope you guys don't believe small-gang PvP can utilize carrier, otherwise it would be really ridiculous. At the very least it takes like 10 damage-dealers alone to counter a single triage carrier and defining a gang of 15 as small will show just how blobtarded eve has become.
You are definitely missing a true small-scale view on PvP, something between 1-5 man, where logistics are not used but constant communication is compulsory.
Btw, no one said anything about cyno mechanics? How does that make any sense  14 |

Zarnak Wulf
Imperial Outlaws
475
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:14:00 -
[74] - Quote
FW: LP for mission running MIGHT get nerfed. More LP for kills for the losing side. Better system upgrades without details.... I hope more thought has gone into this since the summit. It didn't seem like anyone was on the same page. CCP Soundwave is a nullseccer at heart too. If a corp/ alliance fails in null they can retreat to low or empire, reinvent themselves, and recommit back to null. That's not an option for FW as it is a self contained system.
Ship balancing: Interceptors are not ok. A pure missile typhoon with a TP bonus? Yuck. You realize you need to be within 20km to use those, right? |

Takeshi Yamato
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
239
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:14:00 -
[75] - Quote
Also, no discussion about how +30% falloff tracking enhancers have shifted the game more towards kiting, not-having-to commit-to-a-fight and bluntly put, winmatar? An analysis: fixing active tanking in a logical manner: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1693846 |

Ethan Revenant
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:18:00 -
[76] - Quote
Proposal of ditching force fields for docking modules and ship mooring makes me a sad panda. What is the underlying goal behind removing force fields and do you have other options for exploring it on the table somewhere? |

Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2117
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:19:00 -
[77] - Quote
Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Ytterbium: GÇ¥Something I really don't like in Factional Warfare, is just the capital hot drop. To me it has nothing to do with what Factional Warfare is supposed to do.GÇ¥ Elise: GÇ£Well I don't know, triages are pretty cool small gang PvP thing.GÇ¥
I lol'ed. Hope you guys don't believe small-gang PvP can utilize carrier, otherwise it would be really ridiculous. At the very least it takes like 10 damage-dealers alone to counter a single triage carrier and defining a gang of 15 as small will show just how blobtarded eve has become.
You are definitely missing a true small-scale view on PvP, something between 1-5 man, where logistics are not used but constant communication is compulsory.
There are plenty of people out there that consider 10-15 people small gang PVP. Just because it doesn't fit into your master plan for how EVE PVP should work doesn't mean it is wrong. Perhaps you might spend a little more time outside of your bunker and see how the rest of us inferior people play the game. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|

Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:20:00 -
[78] - Quote
Great read. Will read again
Great job on the minutes. |

Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
278
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:21:00 -
[79] - Quote
Would have liked some more information on what all these CCP employees are actually working on... 
POS revamp in early 2013, ring mining being pushed back to winter 2013, destructible outposts completely off the map, no timeline for a sov rework, nothing on bringing PI closer in line with its original design goals, nothing about the corp management UI, ...
the only positive surprise was that there seems to be some progress on an improved S&I UI.
I still have the feeling that the "iterations" concept is bad for the game - features are released in a bare-bones state that does not meet the expectations set when they were drafted, followed up by a series of small iterations that mostly fix bugs and improve usability, until focus turns elsewhere while essential parts of the original vision (that was underlying the design of the feature) never get realized.
At the same time I find it impossible to believe the "no more Jesus features" commitment when I read discussion such as the one on the revamped POSes - I can tell you today that 2/3 of the "awesome" ideas discussed in that session will never make it into actual planning while the remaining third will be postponed for future iterations and then forgotten because some more pressing issue comes along.
DUST seems to go the way of WiS - its core feature, the interaction between EVE and DUST players, that has been emphasized over and over again over the past year simply won't be available at launch.
Want me to dig up all the interviews in which CCP employees promised "EVE and DUST players will be in the same chat channels, corporations and alliances", "EVE and DUST will share the same economy", "0.0 alliances will very much want to hire DUST mercenaries for their wars", ... all these key selling points seem to be hazy at best and got postponed into the indefinite future.
I see a lot of :18months: and I don't really see where all these resources go to.
|

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War DarkSide.
730
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:21:00 -
[80] - Quote
Two step wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:CCP Ytterbium: GÇ¥Something I really don't like in Factional Warfare, is just the capital hot drop. To me it has nothing to do with what Factional Warfare is supposed to do.GÇ¥ Elise: GÇ£Well I don't know, triages are pretty cool small gang PvP thing.GÇ¥
I lol'ed. Hope you guys don't believe small-gang PvP can utilize carrier, otherwise it would be really ridiculous. At the very least it takes like 10 damage-dealers alone to counter a single triage carrier and defining a gang of 15 as small will show just how blobtarded eve has become.
You are definitely missing a true small-scale view on PvP, something between 1-5 man, where logistics are not used but constant communication is compulsory.
There are plenty of people out there that consider 10-15 people small gang PVP. Just because it doesn't fit into your master plan for how EVE PVP should work doesn't mean it is wrong. Perhaps you might spend a little more time outside of your bunker and see how the rest of us inferior people play the game. Yeah. Everyone knows you 'are small gang compared to 0.0 guys'  14 |
|

Salpun
Paramount Commerce
365
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:25:00 -
[81] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Would have liked some more information on what all these CCP employees are actually working on...  POS revamp in early 2013, ring mining being pushed back to winter 2013, destructible outposts completely off the map, no timeline for a sov rework, nothing on bringing PI closer in line with its original design goals, nothing about the corp management UI, ... the only positive surprise was that there seems to be some progress on an improved S&I UI. I still have the feeling that the "iterations" concept is bad for the game - features are released in a bare-bones state that does not meet the expectations set when they were drafted, followed up by a series of small iterations that mostly fix bugs and improve usability, until focus turns elsewhere while essential parts of the original vision (that was underlying the design of the feature) never get realized. At the same time I find it impossible to believe the "no more Jesus features" commitment when I read discussion such as the one on the revamped POSes - I can tell you today that 2/3 of the "awesome" ideas discussed in that session will never make it into actual planning while the remaining third will be postponed for future iterations and then forgotten because some more pressing issue comes along. DUST seems to go the way of WiS - its core feature, the interaction between EVE and DUST players, that has been emphasized over and over again over the past year simply won't be available at launch. Want me to dig up all the interviews in which CCP employees promised "EVE and DUST players will be in the same chat channels, corporations and alliances", "EVE and DUST will share the same economy", "0.0 alliances will very much want to hire DUST mercenaries for their wars", ... all these key selling points seem to be hazy at best and got postponed into the indefinite future. I see a lot of :18months: and I don't really see where all these resources go to. Things can change alot in 2 months when the patch goes out on the 8th we will start to hear more about the winter stuff |

Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
286
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:29:00 -
[82] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Would have liked some more information on what all these CCP employees are actually working on...  POS revamp in early 2013, ring mining being pushed back to winter 2013, destructible outposts completely off the map, no timeline for a sov rework, nothing on bringing PI closer in line with its original design goals, nothing about the corp management UI, ... the only positive surprise was that there seems to be some progress on an improved S&I UI. I still have the feeling that the "iterations" concept is bad for the game - features are released in a bare-bones state that does not meet the expectations set when they were drafted, followed up by a series of small iterations that mostly fix bugs and improve usability, until focus turns elsewhere while essential parts of the original vision (that was underlying the design of the feature) never get realized. At the same time I find it impossible to believe the "no more Jesus features" commitment when I read discussion such as the one on the revamped POSes - I can tell you today that 2/3 of the "awesome" ideas discussed in that session will never make it into actual planning while the remaining third will be postponed for future iterations and then forgotten because some more pressing issue comes along. DUST seems to go the way of WiS - its core feature, the interaction between EVE and DUST players, that has been emphasized over and over again over the past year simply won't be available at launch. Want me to dig up all the interviews in which CCP employees promised "EVE and DUST players will be in the same chat channels, corporations and alliances", "EVE and DUST will share the same economy", "0.0 alliances will very much want to hire DUST mercenaries for their wars", ... all these key selling points seem to be hazy at best and got postponed into the indefinite future. I see a lot of :18months: and I don't really see where all these resources go to. At some point CCP has to deliver the features they love to talk about at FanFest and player meetings so much, and all your current organization allows you to deliver are hollow structures of what could have been (and were hyped as) awesome features (see mercenary marketplace for the most recent example, compare the original vision with the actual product, tell me this is satisfying state of affairs).
agreed. seems as if mose of the developers are working on dust. Things are just moving way to slow in this game 
On holiday. -áIn some other world. Where the music of the radio was a labyrinth of sonorous colours. To a bright centre of absolute convicton where the dripping patchouli was more than scent, It was a sun-á |

Dierdra Vaal
Veto. Veto Corp
186
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:32:00 -
[83] - Quote
Question 2 while I wait on the answer to my question 1 (page 3 of this thread):
Pages 93-95 Crimewatch
Was there no discussion about the change in sec status hits that was discussed at fanfest (essentially meaning lowsec piracy would no longer lock a pirate out of high sec)? I would love to know if that idea (a great idea!) was scrapped or if it's still going to happen - and if so, when?
Veto #205 * * * Director Emeritus at EVE University * * * CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |

Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
279
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:38:00 -
[84] - Quote
Salpun wrote:Things can change alot in 2 months when the patch goes out on the 8th we will start to hear more about the winter stuff I doubt it - from my PoV the general issue is that the backlog of items that both players and developers can agree need significant attention is just far bigger than the willingness of CCP to assign resources to EVE.
CCP developers and the CSM agree on many existing issues, discuss possible solutions - and know there is no way that the feature they just spent an hour discussing will actually be implemented within the next year. The comment about destroyable outposts being discussed at every single CSM summit was spot on:
What point is there to rehash the same discussions on topics such as "farms and fields", "sov revamp", "mining", ... on every summit (and FanFest) when it is obvious that CCP won't commit the resources to actually implement any of these in the foreseeable future.
And meanwhile CCP is pushing out a half-finished (yet delayed) DUST 514 and looking to resume work on WoD (see their hiring advert after 38 studios shut down).
I guess the joke is on me for having believed that things would actually change for the better after last year's debacle. |

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2315
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:44:00 -
[85] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:Salpun wrote:Things can change alot in 2 months when the patch goes out on the 8th we will start to hear more about the winter stuff I doubt it - from my PoV the general issue is that the backlog of items that both players and developers can agree need significant attention is just far bigger than the willingness of CCP to assign resources to EVE. CCP developers and the CSM agree on many existing issues, discuss possible solutions - and know there is no way that this feature will actually be implemented within the next year,. The comment about destroyable outposts being discussed at every single CSM summit was spot on: What point is there to rehash the same discussions on topics such as "farms and fields", "sov revamp", "mining", ... on every single summit (and FanFest) when it is obvious that CCP won't commit the resources to actually implement any of these in the foreseeable future. And meanwhile CCP is pushing out a half-finished (yet delayed) DUST 514 and looking to resume work on WoD (see their hiring advert after 38 studios shut down). I guess the joke is on me for having believed that things would actually change after last year's debacle.
How very true, absolutely none of the back log of significant issues have been dealt with in the last year. 
By the way, DUST is far more than "half-finished", and WOD was never taken off of the table. Perhaps you shouldn't presume quite so much.  To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |

Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
279
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 21:52:00 -
[86] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:By the way, DUST is far more than "half-finished", and WOD was never taken off of the table. Perhaps you shouldn't presume quite so much.  You are of course right and I am of course ranting a bit - but the two core components of DUST that matter for me as an EVE player - its effect on PI and 0.0 sov - which were hyped as a central part of what makes DUST special seem to be delayed and their eventual design seems to be unclear even to CCP.
The "How will the DUST<->EVE link actually work?" question that payers have been asking for well over a year now seems to be answered with "there won't be much of a link at release" which invites the bittervet in me to draw parallels to similar questions ("What will actual WiS gameplay look like?") that CCP never answered with grand visions but never in a straight-forward fashion.
AFAIK WoD was effectively on ice after last year's downsizing and I liked it that way seems that CCP thinks they can start investing more resources into it once the cash from DUST starts rolling in which is of course not something I am particularly happy with. |

Two step
Aperture Harmonics K162
2118
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 22:00:00 -
[87] - Quote
CCP talked a fair amount about their DUST plans at FF. You might want to go back and watch some of the video. It will start out with integration into FW, and nullsec will come later, once the dust (har har) settles from launch CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|

Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
279
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 22:07:00 -
[88] - Quote
Two step wrote:CCP talked a fair amount about their DUST plans at FF. You might want to go back and watch some of the video. It will start out with integration into FW, and nullsec will come later, once the dust (har har) settles from launch I watched the FF videos at the time and I read the discussion on the DUST<->FW link in these CSM minutes.
I fully understand that CCP wants to be very careful about not accidentally messing up essential parts of EVE by making an EVE<->DUST link too important while DUST and its players are still poorly understood.
I don't understand that after years of DUST development CCP still doesn't seem to have any detailed design plans on these outstanding features which they could share with the CSM or the players (and I tend to attribute this to shortcomings in the CCP version of agile development as the same issue keeps showing up in completely unrelated projects and teams; very high level design gets done, technical underpinnings get done and the low-level design that actually defines the game functionality and user experience is improvised on the go).
It seems that they designed a game - which is marketed as revolutionary because of its interaction with EVE - as a generic FPS with a link to EVE bolted on during a late stage of (design) development to the point that the intended design of that link will be unclear even at DUST launch. |

Tanaka Aiko
ICE is Coming to EVE Goonswarm Federation
98
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 22:16:00 -
[89] - Quote
concerning the POS ideas : I do like a lot what was said, but as also said, removing forcefield will be a big issue for fleet on 0.0.
for people who don't know, we can wait 20-40-60mn on the staging POS, waiting for jump bridge or for call to go manually. it would obviously not be possible without a protection, as given the time we'll often be afk.
and it can't be done docked, as we can't see the situation while docked. we need to know if it's safe to undock... or simply if the fleet is still here !
an anchorable shield as proposed would be okay, but there must be something.
but I see it again ; except for FF (where I wonder what the good solution is) I loved what I read here.
currently it takes ages to mount a POS, which look like a pile of junk without any soul, so having a modular system, with only one unique object which looks great and where we can dock would be really great for immersion. we don't feel "at home currently" on a POS. |

Malcom Vincent
14
|
Posted - 2012.08.02 22:34:00 -
[90] - Quote
I understand that you guys want more accountability and transparency.
However, this report is 165 pages of jibberjabber.
Is there a bulletpoint version for those of us that don't care about your needs to be accountable and proper and transparent and all that is "good"?
If not, I guess I'll take a over the next few weeks but right now there is a lot of stuff I don't need to know/care for and it will take time to filter out all that stuff.
Thanks! EVE Stratics! Managing Editor Interviews, News, Guides, Reviews, free forums and more! @EVEStratics |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |