| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Dino Boff
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
9
   |
Posted - 2012.08.10 11:50:00 -
[121] - Quote
All those complains about docking, are you just trolling two step? When do we ever fight at a POS? Fight in wh space happen on sites, on WH or at POCOs. The only time we fight at a POS is when we bash them and the only thing we kill there, mostly, are capital that committed to the fight.
How is dockable POS going to change that?
About the other complains. It will allow defenders to hide their numbers and their fleet composition. But the hunters have such an advantage in w-space, that that change is a good thing imho.
The only challenges with the new POS are how do we find them and can any cloues be given on how active they are. CCP needs to find a design solution for those challenges. |
kapolov
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:08:00 -
[122] - Quote
Dino Boff wrote:All those complains about docking, are you just trolling two step? When do we ever fight at a POS? Fight in wh space happen on sites, on WH or at POCOs. The only time we fight at a POS is when we bash them and the only thing we kill there, mostly, are capital that committed to the fight.
How is dockable POS going to change that?
About the other complains. It will allow defenders to hide their numbers and their fleet composition. But the hunters have such an advantage in w-space, that that change is a good thing imho.
The only challenges with the new POS are how do we find them and can any cloues be given on how active they are. CCP needs to find a design solution for those challenges.
I hope they make you sing something extremely embarrassing on TS or at least punch you in the neck. |
Senn Denroth
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:20:00 -
[123] - Quote
kapolov wrote:I hope they make you sing something extremely embarrassing on TS or at least punch you in the neck.
Dino doesn't use teamspeak.
Hint: Use your main account to post next time so people actually pay attention to what you're saying.
On the subject at hand, I look forward to see what you have to say about the new mechanics Two Step, and fixing many of the challenges behind said changes (at least I hope the players are listened to about their concern). |
IgnasS
High Intellion
Exhale.
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:45:00 -
[124] - Quote
Dino Boff wrote:All those complains about docking, are you just trolling two step? When do we ever fight at a POS? Fight in wh space happen on sites, on WH or at POCOs. The only time we fight at a POS is when we bash them and the only thing we kill there, mostly, are capital that committed to the fight.
How is dockable POS going to change that?
About the other complains. It will allow defenders to hide their numbers and their fleet composition. But the hunters have such an advantage in w-space, that that change is a good thing imho.
The only challenges with the new POS are how do we find them and can any cloues be given on how active they are. CCP needs to find a design solution for those challenges.
 I really hope you're just trolling... |
Sedilis
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
17
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:47:00 -
[125] - Quote
Two step wrote:
W-space is about lack of information, and making people work hard just to survive there. The exact mechanics of a forcefield or no forcefield has nothing at all to do with the reason people enjoy living in w-space. I'd challenge *anyone* to ask people for their top 10 reasons they like w-space and see POSes *anywhere* on that list.
Completely true.
As the leader of a large wpsace corp, and the guy responsible for housing our members all I really want is secure storage for our members without having to jump through hoops to turn a completely broken system into half broken one as we do right now.
My concern with having ships moored at a docking ring is how scaleable that will be. Lets say you have 20 people living at a POS and each of them has 10 ships (a conservative number). That is 200 ships they would need to moor. While that would look cool it's going to be hell to load grid.
Equally having ships and their pilots disappear into the POS like being fully docked at a station would present us with a major intel gathering problem and could worsen the issue of people hiding from PvP. I donGÇÖt really care about docking games because you already have forcefield games and we rarely fight on a POS.
Some kind of secure SMA where you can only remove your own ships sounds like the best option but there are good technical reasons why that's really hard to do (you ship is destroyed by the server when docking / stored and no longer belongs to you). The idea of the docking ring is to keep the ship in space and retain the owner.
IGÇÖm ok with not having a force field surrounding the whole pos; that is going to be difficult if you can build your POS into whatever shape you want. But having a force field module you can build in at strategic points to enable ships to safeup would be solve a lot of the issues raised. Unless you can fully dock (and I hope you canGÇÖt) you will need somewhere to safely warp into when you log on.
@NPC forum alts. You've views don't count unless you post with your main. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
Project Wildfire
375
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 12:56:00 -
[126] - Quote
Dino Boff wrote:
The only challenges with the new POS are how do we find them and can any cloues be given on how active they are. CCP needs to find a design solution for those challenges.
You use dscan to pinpoint the pos to a moon and then you click warp...  |
Dino Boff
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:40:00 -
[127] - Quote
The new pos might be anchored anywhere |
Bane Nucleus
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost
182
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 13:47:00 -
[128] - Quote
If I have to drop combat probes to find someones POS, the sneaky factor goes to 0, and wh space goes to ****.
Alliance Diplomat, Recruiter |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
241
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:40:00 -
[129] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:If I have to drop combat probes to find someones POS, the sneaky factor goes to 0, and wh space goes to ****.
Have to reveal yourself to find a pos.
Finding pos is meaningless because 2000 carebears are docked in a "dock" module and you can't see them
welcome to wormholes 2.0, everything is awful edition
I'm also not quite sure what "need" there is to allow POS to be put up anywhere at all, rather than requiring them being on a moon. |
corbexx
Aperture Harmonics
K162
19
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 14:48:00 -
[130] - Quote
well i'd rather wait for more info on stuff before making judgements ccp is pretty terrible for changing stuff at the last minute.
|
|
|
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc.
30
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:00:00 -
[131] - Quote
Gnaw LF wrote:Two step wrote:Meytal wrote:
pile of trolling snipped
Yeah, because what this thread really needs is more total exaggeration and a few terrible ideas. As I said, I need to write up a longer blog post to more fully explain my ideas, which I will try to do this weekend. I think people are worrying *far* too much about docking games, and things like contracts would simply make it more convenient for people to live in w-space. Note that I didn't say *easier*, but some of you people are acting like fighting against the UI is a lot more fun than fighting people. People might not like to fight against the UI but what they love to do is fight against each other. You have multiple pages of explanations and discussions on how the changes proposed in CSM minutes will reduce the potential for fun fights. Might I recommend that you focus on that? Tell us how new POSes and how your ideas will bring us more pew instead of little gimmicks like Contracts and Markets.
QFT, sums it up nicely. |
Tommassino Preldent
SON OF RAVANA
2
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:30:00 -
[132] - Quote
Im not sure if anybody thought about this, but... How is gonna rorqual compression work without a force field? |
Gnaw LF
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
146
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 15:38:00 -
[133] - Quote
corbexx wrote:well i'd rather wait for more info on stuff before making judgements ccp is pretty terrible for changing stuff at the last minute.
I have to say that the wait and see approach is pretty bad, as others have pointed out any company that has invested man hours into creating and polishing a feature will be extremely reluctant to change it. That is why you have people voicing their opinions and ideas right now, there is nothing wrong with that. Add to all this the fact that CSM minutes have been released to the public with a significant delay (understandably) and we have already heard an interview with a dev during the ATX tourney where he mentioned removal of Force Fields. So yeah, at this point we do not know how far along the new POS system is in the design cycle.
What we probably need is an organized petition to CCP to pick a w-space system at random and install a statue to something, later on we can all temp blue each other, scan each other into the system and shoot the dammned thing. In all seriousness though, I do not think we are asking for much here. We just want the devs to provide us with better info as to the reasons for FF removal, then simply keep us in the loop on the choices taken for the new POS design. |
Indo Nira
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Exhale.
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 16:34:00 -
[134] - Quote
well.. i think i know why twostep doesn't see docking in whspace as an issue, maybe aharm is moving into nullsec? :D or maybe hs even |
Bane Nucleus
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost
183
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 18:52:00 -
[135] - Quote
Two Step has been bought out by the rest of the CSM O_O CONSPIRACY!
Alliance Diplomat, Recruiter |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise
No Holes Barred
79
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 19:20:00 -
[136] - Quote
Things we need:
Being able to check online/offline towers through dscan
Being able to check online players, unless cloaked, through dcan, also in poses
Being unable to play docking games
If that is sorted in the new pos system, I'd welcome it greatly.
Other things to consider:
If a Pos can be placed anywhere but moons, wh defenses can be extreme
If a pos can be placed anywhere but moons, poses will be placed far far out in system (The old fighter lost connection tricky thingy)
If Poses can be placed so far away from moons through that trick, they can no longer be traced through d-scan. Very big issue.
Hope you get it sorted
Cheers
Arch. |
Indo Nira
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Exhale.
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 21:16:00 -
[137] - Quote
Archdaimon wrote:Things we need:
Being able to check online/offline towers through dscan
come one, why are you so lazy?!?! you can already do that, with adding forcefields to the overview....
i'll give you a guide, on one of your overview tabs (the scouting one) add forcefields from filters, then, when you're dscanning for poses ( you know how to do that, right) lower the angle so that you can only see the towers from a single planet (let's say you're doing this from the sun). if the planet has a pos on one of it's moons with no forcefields, it's offline, if it doesn't, it's not. boom, fixed.
P.S. if a planet has more then one pos, warp to the planet at 100 or whatever pleases you, turn on moon brackets (shift+alt+x i think) and do the same, but looking at the moons.
P.P.S. stop asking for handouts, do your work as a scout. |
jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
105
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 22:40:00 -
[138] - Quote
Indo Nira wrote:Archdaimon wrote:Things we need:
Being able to check online/offline towers through dscan
come one, why are you so lazy?!?! you can already do that, with adding forcefields to the overview....
Indeed, we can, the point is that the new POSes (which are supposedly ditching FFs) may NOT allow us to, and we don't want to lose it. |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise
No Holes Barred
81
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 23:20:00 -
[139] - Quote
Indo Nira wrote:Archdaimon wrote:Things we need:
Being able to check online/offline towers through dscan
come one, why are you so lazy?!?! you can already do that, with adding forcefields to the overview.... i'll give you a guide, on one of your overview tabs (the scouting one) add forcefields from filters, then, when you're dscanning for poses ( you know how to do that, right) lower the angle so that you can only see the towers from a single planet (let's say you're doing this from the sun). if the planet has a pos on one of it's moons with no forcefields, it's offline, if it doesn't, it's not. boom, fixed. P.S. if a planet has more then one pos, warp to the planet at 100 or whatever pleases you, turn on moon brackets (shift+alt+x i think) and do the same, but looking at the moons. P.P.S. stop asking for handouts, do your work as a scout.
Someone really did not read the thread now did he?
At least we agree :D
|
Madner Kami
Durendal Ascending
Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub
41
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 02:01:00 -
[140] - Quote
Tommassino Preldent wrote:Im not sure if anybody thought about this, but... How is gonna rorqual compression work without a force field?
Either in the asteroid field, where you'll sit to boost your mining operations as some people demand (see the current ganglink grid-only discussions), in another vulnerable position somewhere in space or not at all. In other words it goes the same way as any non-covertopsable industry wtihout FFs: Down the gutter. |
|
|
Malken
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost
47
|
Posted - 2012.08.11 19:06:00 -
[141] - Quote
and to those wanting clone access in WH space all i can say is that you are nuts.
podding people is a way to remove people from the WH and a direct meter on winning the fight as they have helluva lot harder to get back into the fight for said WH.
Gÿ+/
/Gûî
/ \
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
Project Wildfire
375
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 00:16:00 -
[142] - Quote
Sorry if someone has already said this but i don't think it will matter if we can't tell if the new POS's are offline or not, using d-scan.
Haven't people been asking for the ability to salvage/hack/unanchor abandoned POS's for a while now?
If they let us do that there won't be an issue because nobody is going to intentionally leave a place holder pos somewhere if it can be stolen.
|
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
247
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 00:21:00 -
[143] - Quote
Malken wrote:and to those wanting clone access in WH space all i can say is that you are nuts.
podding people is a way to remove people from the WH and a direct meter on winning the fight as they have helluva lot harder to get back into the fight for said WH.
I think the majority of people who want clones in wh space aren't thinking about getting podded and waking up back in wh space, but rather about the ability to switch implants.
|
Zedah Zoid
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 00:30:00 -
[144] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:Gnaw LF wrote:
People might not like to fight against the UI but what they love to do is fight against each other. You have multiple pages of explanations and discussions on how the changes proposed in CSM minutes will reduce the potential for fun fights. Might I recommend that you focus on that? Tell us how new POSes and how your ideas will bring us more pew instead of little gimmicks like Contracts and Markets.
THIS. 99% of the people in wormhole space don't give a rats rectum about docking, markets, etc... We care about changing T3 subs, making pos security better and having a place for us to store our crap. Forcefields don't need to be gone for that to happen. Docking doesn't need to take place for that to happen. It honestly seems like CCP wants to reinvent the wheel, when it isn't really needed. The whole K.I.S.S attitude should apply here (Keep It Simple Stupid) Wormhole space is one of the few places in Eve that isn't butchered to all hell. Let's keep it that way.
I honestly don't know how to say it much better than this. Mooring the active ship is fine with me. I don't care if I can't see inactive ships. But no docking period. It just makes no sense. If you guys want to have a docking module for a POS that's fine. Just tie it to Sov like TCU's and don't allow that module in WH space. Keep our SMA's and add mooring if you want. I have no problem with some change here but it is clear nobody wants timers and docking games in WH space. And don't make docking available in C5 and C6's but not in C1-C4's.
Please do a blog post about this Twostep because based on what you've said here and what's in the minutes this is not looking good. You folks are basically ignoring your voting base. Nobody(well mostly nobody) is up in arms yet or screaming for heads while carrying pitchforks and torches. We know this is still fluid. But better to get the points across now rather than wait for it to show up on Sisi and be told, "Oh sorry. We can't change that now, it's too far along." |
Soon Shin
Caucasian Culture Club
Transmission Lost
129
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 05:29:00 -
[145] - Quote
I must agree with the sentiment here. As nice it would be to have a station in wormhole space for convenience, I would rather not have to deal with docking games. (unless ofcourse the pos module that he's hiding in doesn't have reinforce timer and a not a lot of hitpoints)
|
Mr Floydy
The Xenodus Initiative.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
18
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 10:54:00 -
[146] - Quote
Pink Marshmellow wrote:Thinking about Forcefields, what do you think about its removal?
Im a bit half and half about the situation. The radius of forcefields around poses makes a lot of weapon systems and ships unable to hit the tower.
But at the same time it provides a niche for certain weapon systems like torpedoes.
This is currently the only reason I can see behind getting rid of forcefields as they are.
But surely it could be better fixed by tweaking the code so you do something crazy.... like shooting the outside of the forcefield!
Surely it can't be *that* hard to modify the force field code like this.
*shrugs* |
Dino Boff
Lead Farmers
Kill It With Fire
9
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 11:00:00 -
[147] - Quote
IMHO, docking games will be better than force field games. By games, I mean when the defender get out of the POS to alpha a weak ship or to kill a bubble but don't want to commit to a fight.
Currently, with force field, the defender will get some few hundred meters out of the force field and shoot something. The siege fleet will rep what the defender is shooting and send some ship over to try to bump him off. As soon as a ship come too close, the defender get back in and try again on the opposite side. it's quite boring, but one of the less boring of POS bashing activities, so we still play it even if the chance to bump him off correctly and in time is so low.
With a dock, the defender undock, shoot for some time until he need to deaggress to redock. The sieging fleet has one minute to bump out of the undock him and any logistic or carrier undocking to rep (by then, hopefully, repping will give aggression and prevent the ship from docking right away).
Also, defender might be more willing to get out to commit to a fight since if it's easier to surprise the sieging fleet (or ganking fleet if it is to go help a corp mate being ambushed).
Personally, as long as we can sneakily judge if a POS is active or not, I am ok with the occupant fleet composition being hidden. CCP could design those POS with visual clues of activity or we could have a POS scanner. |
TheGunslinger42
Bite Me inc
Elysian Empire
247
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 20:00:00 -
[148] - Quote
Dino Boff wrote:IMHO, docking games will be better than force field games. By games, I mean when the defender get out of the POS to alpha a weak ship or to kill a bubble but don't want to commit to a fight.
Currently, with force field, the defender will get some few hundred meters out of the force field and shoot something. The siege fleet will rep what the defender is shooting and send some ships over to try to bump him off. As soon as a ship come too close, the defender get back in and try again on the opposite side. it's quite boring, but one of the less boring of POS bashing activities, so we still play it even if the chance to bump him off correctly and in time is so low.
With a dock, the defender undock, shoot for some time until he need to deaggress to redock. The sieging fleet has one minute to bump out of the undock him and any logistic or carrier undocking to rep (by then, hopefully, repping will give aggression and prevent the ship from docking right away).
Also, defender might be more willing to get out to commit to a fight since if it's easier to surprise the sieging fleet (or ganking fleet if it is to go help a corp mate being ambushed).
Personally, as long as we can sneakily judge if a POS is active or not, I am ok with the occupant fleet composition being hidden. CCP could design those POS with visual clues of activity or we could have a POS scanner.
Docking games are god awful. |
Chitsa Jason
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Exhale.
134
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 21:37:00 -
[149] - Quote
/me still waiting for TwoStep to post blog post about POSes |
Shenra Twrin
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.08.12 23:50:00 -
[150] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:/me still waiting for TwoStep to post blog post about POSes
I think he still licking is wounds after you killed his Archon and Pod, so we gonna need to wait for an answere.
also the comment on the pod his actualy funny |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |