|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
   |
Posted - 2011.05.10 20:32:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Mini-objectives are a pretty obvious point for us to look at this winter. As I mentioned, we'll be looking at that in the months to come, hopefully we can make a bigger announcement when the CSM have been here. But yes, you're right, we should have mini-objectives, and hopefully we will.
Could you comment on the reasoning behind nerfing 0.0 now, and then revamping it "later" rather than a coherent overall change that makes sense and addresses the region in a unified way - instead of this "make bad change, promise fix in six months", especially given CCP's extremely bad record on delivering things promised in advance.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 20:53:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Weaselior on 10/05/2011 20:56:14
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Zamiq
Again, you have not told us why this change will increase the chances of this non-consensual pvp that you keep talking about. I mean the people with an intel channel and a JB will stay as people with an intel channel and a JB and it does not take a genius to figure out that if a roaming gang has been spotted 3 jumps away from a JB location then its not safe to go there.
It increases traffic in areas that are more accessible to players outside your alliance. It's a given that a POS with guns, shields and a jumpbridge to another friendly POS is inherently safer than a stargate. While it's certainly possible to kill people at POSs, it's a bit more complex than just roaming around, killing people in open space.
you know what would have fixed this without making things a pain in the ass for everyone, right?
beacons for jb's and fitting requirements that make guns impossible
presto, pvp is saved but without mindless tedium
edit: watch as I fix ganking without making me waste my time with gates:
a jump bridge requires 5m power
a jump bridge has the same global beacon as a TCU
boom, problem solved
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 20:59:00 -
[3]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: FellRaven
The biggest issue with PvP in 0.0 are bots that warp to safes and cloak when a hostile enters local, roam in RMT space and you'll see what I mean.
Get your priorities sorted
I'm not entirely sure why you'd assume we can't deal with both? As far as I'm aware, CCP Sreegs has been kicking ass and taking names on the botting front.
yes your campaign that has only hit roidripper bots in highsec and market bots in stations with any real consistency is doing wonders on that front
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:01:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
I think we're doing this in terms of longer scale development, at least to some extent. We're developing the plan, which we'll share with the CSM this month, and hopefully we'll be able to show the players shortly after that.
This is an isolated change that has been slated to happen for a while.
seriously why wasn't "removing guns from JB pos" considered since it's stupid easy to do, does a better job than your proposal, and doesn't increase tedium
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:02:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Gourdo
Of course they like the idea. It is their alliances/friends that will benefit from the changes the most. These changes as they stand without other balances first will make null only for large alliances. Small alliances will not be able to acquire or hold null sov for the most part.
non-technetium 0.0 is so worthless it took ages for anyone to bother to take delve after the owning power was slaughtered and sent fleeing to empire, an undefended region with -1.0 trusec and a large collection of the second-best moons in the game and good plexes
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:10:00 -
[6]
Also the other serious problem is that JB's shouldn't bar rorquals and JFs, there's no gain to blocking them since that doesn't help you defend the cynojammed system and just again increases tedium.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:22:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Malcanis
Edited by: Malcanis on 10/05/2011 21:15:17
I'm genuinely interested to know how having to do a couple of warps between each bridge will "kill 0.0"
Like I said, CCP has screwed up 0.0 so much that Delve - one of the best regions in the game that doesn't have technetium - is so unpleasant nobody wanted it. IT kept sov for forever after they fled back to empire because it just wasn't really worth the time. Now, it's even ****tier: it's deep 0.0 so getting there is just much more of a pain in the ass, traveling is boring as all hell. The only sov worth having is technetium sov, but CCP has implemented two hamfisted nerfs rather than fixing these broad swaths of worthless regions. Delve proved there's already so little value in 0.0 that it's starting to empty out.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:25:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
A wide range of options were considered, among those, different levels of guns on the POS. Everything from changing the fitting requirements to stripping them entirely. At the end of the day, I'm not entirely thrilled about basing smaller scale pvp around POSs. I really like the idea of having it out on the open, at a "neutral" structure like gates. It's much more visible than having to track down a POS that will still give your opponent an advantage.
Make the jump-in point 10km from the JB, remove guns from the pos, and it's a neutral zone just like a stargate, there's no advantage to someone fighting a ganker compared to a stargate at all. You also are ignoring the beacon for the JB which would just reuse TCU code.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:41:00 -
[9]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
I'd still aruge that a defender has much better terms than an attacker. You can still use jumpbridges, you have intel channels, shorter routes to change ships/fittings, shorter routes to getting reinforced.
The attacker wants combat, has organization pre-set up (no need to form a defense gang or such nonsense) can select for "what they can afford to lose", picks the location of the fight, picks the time of the fight, can pre-select shiptypes to increase the power of their gang (right number of logis to other ships, all one type of tank, ect). The attacker has huge advantages you don't consider here.
|
|
|
| |
|