Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
779
|
Posted - 2012.11.19 23:30:00 -
[151] - Quote
CataCourier wrote:I greatly appreciate the work that the CSM has done on this, and sincerely hope that CCP listens and applies these ideas (or some of them) in their design process.
tl;dr: Fix 0.0 industry, buff supercaps/titans in a way that encourages more "super" destruction, give more reason for people to pvp and blow stuff up.
As a "0.0 miner/industrialist", changes to mineral distribution in 0.0 are greatly welcome. Industry as a whole in 0.0 is stale (as Corestwo described) and needs an improvement- both for existing industrialists like myself, and for prospective/newbies that are just starting to play eve.
Like it or not, there are a lot of players that are willing to subscribe for the sole purpose of shooting rocks and building stuff out of it. Even though Eve is a pvp-focused game, CCP (and the playerbase as a whole) would benefit by more industrial minded players subscribing- more production, more consumption, and many, many more tears. The problem is enticing those players to pick up Eve and stick with it. Building 0.0 industry and giving venues for industrial minded players to own and improve their operations would be a huge benefit. Additional system/POS/planet structures and upgrades would allow for growth of 0.0 industry and provide tons of pvp opportunities.
To quickly rattle off some ideas to coincide with the mining section: -Upgraded refineries at POS that give benefits based on the industrial level of the system -Additional system upgrades that allow the spawning of very rich ore sites that show up on overview as a celestial object -Revamp/rebalance 0.0 ores in general (Spod & Gneiss and maybe Dark Ochre) -Redesign Rorqual so they can actually be used in belts (by non-bads) -Once NPC AI is revamped, perhaps a mixed mining/combat site, where there are valuable rewards for both industry and pve (IE: a combat fleet is required to persistently engage NPCs while the miners mine out the site- NPCs spawn based on volume of ore mined, etc). Perhaps this could also show up as a celestial object. -"Permanent", destructible, planetary structures that mine planets for low end ores. This could benefit DUST too. (Permanent means that it can't be un-anchored to dodge impending destruction). These would require industry upgrades active in the system to continue producing minerals.
It seems like the original idea for 0.0 industry was to have an outlet for corps and alliances to have profitable mining ops with their own protection force- enabling them to gather resources while giving enemies a target to aim for. The problem with this in implementation is that there currently isn't enough reward or benefit for having any type of defending fleet or major mining operations, because it's simply more profitable to run hubs/sanctums than it is to support a mining fleet. On top of that, even if a huge mining fleet is assembled and protected, there aren't enough low ends in 0.0 to support real industry without importing the bulk of the minerals.
Aside from the mining/industry section, I am all for more pvp improvements and reasons to fight. There is nothing better for a miner than consistent pvp and destruction- even if that means that you occasionally lose hulks/orcas/rorquals. As Corestwo noted, production of supers/titans has diminished due to the plethora of nerfs against them. I'd also like to see a way for Supers/Titans to be used (and destroyed) more often. That dual mining/PVE site is interesting indeed. Quoting whole post for effect.
EDIT: OK looks like im all caught up. There were a lot of good posts (and some bads) so if i didn't quote you dont take it personally, im probably spamming the thread already as it is haha "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."-á -Arydanika, Voices from the Void
CSM7 rep, CSM 4 vet Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1449
|
Posted - 2012.11.19 23:42:00 -
[152] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:That dual mining/PVE site is interesting indeed. Quoting whole post for effect.
EDIT: OK looks like im all caught up. There were a lot of good posts (and some bads) so if i didn't quote you dont take it personally, im probably spamming the thread already as it is haha No trolling. I'll leave that behind on the first few pages. Fun is over.
You're doing a good job of actually discussing the document. It originally looked like you'd all get defensive and simply defend the document and the ideas you all put forward, rather than discuss openly.
Credit where it is due. Good job here, Aleks. Amarr Militia |
DiaoMoney
DMoney Corp
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 02:07:00 -
[153] - Quote
One issue I would like to add to the POSes:
While player-driven and freedom is the sell point of EVE, the designers should realize that making things vulnerable to attack is not the right way to generate player-driven events: people will simply try their best to avoid that feature .
The ship maintenance array is just a bad example. I will compare it with the corporate hangar array, which is a good one (not perfect but at least much better).
Trust is granted rather than forced upon. When someone hangar-flip a corporation, he was exactly granted the right to access the specified hangar that he can possibly to flip, because the leadership trusted him.
To a ship maintenance array, however, you can only choose to make it "Unusable" or "Totally undefended". The other option that "Manage it by person in role" will just burnout people quickly.
People may argue that this is important to encourage players to build a station. But actually people still need an usable outpost, which functions between a station and a safe spot with just force field.
This is important to populate the null, for smaller forces that live in NPC space or can't afford to build massive stations. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2087
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 03:43:00 -
[154] - Quote
To make people actually use titans? Nerf OGB, done. Now you have to have your Avatar on-grid to get that juicy increase in cap recharge, your Ragnarok has to be on-grid to get that sig radius bonus, etc.
Then there could be new shinies: officer & deadspace warfare links, for example. More warfare links to do simple things like reduce sig resolution of the fleet's weapons (or explosion velocity for missiles). Every skill in a character's skill tree should have a parallel warfare link, allowing a fleet to boost character skills to 6 (because 11 would be ridiculous).
But this is ideas for shinies, not commentary on the CSM white paper. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
918
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 03:52:00 -
[155] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:To make people actually use titans? Nerf OGB, done. Now you have to have your Avatar on-grid to get that juicy increase in cap recharge, your Ragnarok has to be on-grid to get that sig radius bonus, etc.
Then there could be new shinies: officer & deadspace warfare links, for example. More warfare links to do simple things like reduce sig resolution of the fleet's weapons (or explosion velocity for missiles). Every skill in a character's skill tree should have a parallel warfare link, allowing a fleet to boost character skills to 6 (because 11 would be ridiculous).
But this is ideas for shinies, not commentary on the CSM white paper.
This only ever encourages players to put one or two titans at risk at a time, or simply not deploy them at all in favor of weaker but much cheaper command ships. A meaningful battlefield role that doesn't relegate dreads to relative obsolescence and encourages people to deploy 'em if they've got 'em, hopefully to be destroyed, is much better.
In my opinion, of course. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2087
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 03:57:00 -
[156] - Quote
You are right. Why bother increasing the entire fleet's DPS by 5% when you could just keep throwing cheaper ships at the enemy until they suffocate on the wreckage? Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
563
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 03:59:00 -
[157] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:You are right. Why bother increasing the entire fleet's DPS by 5% when you could just keep throwing cheaper ships at the enemy until they suffocate on the wreckage?
There, now you understand the key point of sov warfare!
Seriously though, that's basically it. The only time you'll see Titans on grid is if they're hotdropping, shooting structures, escalating a cap brawl, or in the case of the CFC, clicking jump instead of bridge. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
850
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 05:20:00 -
[158] - Quote
I got caught up in the earlier discussion over the timing to nerf compression or if it would disappear magically.
I always thought one of the main reasons to nerf it was to nerf titan and super construction makeing them a lot harder to build. Bring this up since people want industry in null and want that first before compression nerf.
I am curios to see what level of industry players want in null really. (Like how much they want miners to mine and builders to go through.)
As in miners might be able to supply BS or below with a compression nerf, but would players want miners to support titans and supers easily in null.
With timing, you can nerf compression earlier and hurt supers being built. Or if you do want industry to support their production, then you have to wait longer for compression to be nerfed.
I might have missed though, the conversation of what players actually wanted to be built in null to support a war or so, or how big a war they wanted supported. I'm not shitposting. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
567
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 05:33:00 -
[159] - Quote
The supercap stuff was already addressed by corestwo in this thread ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2198403#post2198403 is a link to the specific post). I'd selectively quote but it's all quite good to read. Also if you're one of those people smart enough not to balk at TM.com, http://themittani.com/features/supercap-proliferation-fixing-solved-problem addresses the point as well. |
None ofthe Above
365
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 05:59:00 -
[160] - Quote
People who are upset about their issues not being talked about, don't understand the purpose of the document.
The CSM outlined a strategy and then picked a couple of example projects and wrote about how to apply the strategy in each case.
It was NOT work on these things because they are more important than everything else.
I direct you to this section:
Quote:Examples for Consideration The following examples, in alphabetical order, are included to provide concrete illustrations of a pillar-based approach in practice. These examples center on themes and concepts widely considered by existing subscribers as significantly broken and would likely need to be spread out over two expansions/12 months. Each area is a significant problem taking money out of CCPGÇÖs pocket through lost or missed subscriptions. They are not wish-lists, but rather illustrations of how new features and iteration can be weaved into powerful, themed expansions with broad demographic appeal.
Its all very fine to use it as a spring board for more conversation (and there has been some excellent examples of that in this thread) but please stop pulling your hair out. That never did me any good. EVE is a sandbox; The only "end-game" content in EVE is the crap that makes you rage-quit.
|
|
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
921
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 07:02:00 -
[161] - Quote
I wrote that article too :ssh:
Mara Rinn wrote:You are right. Why bother increasing the entire fleet's DPS by 5% when you could just keep throwing cheaper ships at the enemy until they suffocate on the wreckage?
How many mindlinks are you really going to be able to invent to give people reason to field more than a few titans in the role you're imagining? At eight links a titan you'll run out of things people will consider worth bringing awfully fast, even in this notional "a mindlink for every skill" scenario. I'd say give them a reason to deployed against each other dozens at a time (this already exists, arguably), give them the means to tackle each other (or give dreadnaughts a new role by allowing them to tackle supers), and lean back to watch the carnage. Imagine how many more supers might have died in that SOLAR vs the world engagement a few weeks back if the supers themselves had been able to tackle each other? Quite a lot more than 7 out of over a hundred deployed on field, I'd hope. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2088
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 07:30:00 -
[162] - Quote
What about expanding the role of titans to deliberately include blapping subcaps?
Or allowing logistics to repair HICs? Tackle dreads might be worthwhile if there was a capital tackle module whose only purpose was to prevent jump drives from functioning. Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
5151
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 07:59:00 -
[163] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:What about expanding the role of titans to deliberately include blapping subcaps?
This has been tried. It did not end well, unless you think roving fleets of dozens of titans killing everything with impunity is "well".
MatrixSkye Mk2: "Remember: You consent to unconsensual PVP the moment you press the "Undock" button." |
Noisrevbus
288
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 08:25:00 -
[164] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:What about expanding the role of titans to deliberately include blapping subcaps?
Or allowing logistics to repair HICs? Tackle dreads might be worthwhile if there was a capital tackle module whose only purpose was to prevent jump drives from functioning.
Logistics can already repair HICs, you just have to operate in tandem with other HIC to maintain points - which makes for a more complex and interesting tactical situation. We don't want the game dumbed down further where more HICs survive and less people commit SC.
The questions seem to operate under the assumption that SC rarely die because they have too easy a time to escape, while in reality SC "rarely" die because as with everything else there's little incentive to commit them from an unfavourable position. Very few groups are ballsy enough to use them as equalizers. It's more common to see them played as a stake rush when you have a good hand. Unlike many other ships in EVE, the loss of one also often hurt a wallet. |
Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics K162
833
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 08:27:00 -
[165] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:What about expanding the role of titans to deliberately include blapping subcaps?
that's exactly what they used to do. issue is it's fine if you have a dozen or less titans per alliance like in the olden days, but now that everyone and their mother flies a titan, 200man titan blobs than can each volley any subcap gets old real fast.
titans need an on field role that no other ship has. until then, they will remain as they are: glorified epeens. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
850
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 11:27:00 -
[166] - Quote
Thanks, but I don't really agree with corestwo's opinoins though.
I do see it as a viable nerf to supers and stuff, if compression was nerfed. If players found a way around it, it would be by doing a ton of work, which really isn't a way around things at all.
Also don't really care about the rate of super deaths or how many there are I suppose, just annoying that it is too easy to get one. But that is a wierder point though.
I mostly made my post off of corestwo's post though, about how the miners and industry peeps would have to carry the null sec residents if compression was nerfed. Suppose, with some of his opinions he wouldn't allow anyone to carry him though. Personally I don't think I could ever support super production really, but BS sized hulls would be worth debating over. I'm not shitposting. |
Sinzor Aumer
Atlas Research Group Aerodyne Collective
24
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 12:45:00 -
[167] - Quote
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:Kirith Kodachi wrote:While I like a lot of what was said in this document, I am a little disappointed that nothing was said in regards to supercap proliferation and dominance contributing to the stagnancy of null sec.
Overall, B+. Moving away from structure grinds and (eventually) getting the ship balancing team done with subcaps and onto caps/supers will help with this. On the production/death specifics, there's a lot of controversy about it, as evidenced with the fight over mineral compression in this thread. My personal feeling is that while their production rate has been reduced, super capitals were intended to be rare and any month where triple digits of supers are being produced is a bad month. I think they need to be harder to build (or have disrupting their building be easier), i think they need a battlefield role that differentiates them from carriers/dreads but is never the less so compelling that you WANT to use your super fleet, and I think that super fleet needs to have more threats to it while they're deployed. Obviously a lot of these goals are competing, but somewhere in the balance between them is the sweetspot where supers will be useful and the death/production numbers so close that during particularly violent months we might see the global number drop (which it hasnt for like 3 years) The issue of proliferation can be dealt with pretty easily, without increasing death rate or otherwise messing it with PVP activity. And I'm not talking about nerfing production as well, as nerfing the industry in nullsec is not a good idea at all.
You just need to impose maintenance costs for the owner of a supercapital ship, these costs should be considerable and comparable to the production costs. I'll present the draft of this mechanics, but I dont insist it should be exactly as I say - just to give a general idea.
Every day you should put you super into a ship maintenance array, and click "pass maintenance". It would take 15 minutes and will consume some random amount of capital components. If you dont pass maintenance, your ship would loose 1% of max shield, armor, structure and capacitor every day after downtime. When you finally decide to pass it - it would cost you more time and materials, proportional to the number of skipped days. |
Besbin
Balderfrey Holding inc
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 12:57:00 -
[168] - Quote
ma perke wrote: - create more interaction. for instance on completing an anomally you get next annomaly in different system - this will increase traffic i.e. interaction. of course should be ballanced with increased bounties.
It's there already: Escalations. However, I see no reason why the escalation chance should be as low as it is right now. And it should be easy code to just increase that chance significantly. |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
921
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 18:02:00 -
[169] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:What about expanding the role of titans to deliberately include blapping subcaps?
The ability to do this is exactly why, up until recently (last November for supercarriers, April for titans) supers were proliferating at such a sky-high rate. The fact that their rate of production fell off a cliff after those nerfs is rather telling. Players love flying overpowered ships, who knew. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group
783
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 19:08:00 -
[170] - Quote
corestwo wrote:Players love flying overpowered ships, who knew. I'm shocked you would suggest such a thing! ;p
Supers already have a maintenance cost atm: PLEX. Because the character cant leave that ship, using a super on your "main" is rare indeed. So 600m/month. Now if you COULD leave it safely maybe some kind of in-game upkeep would make sense "Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."-á -Arydanika, Voices from the Void
CSM7 rep, CSM 4 vet Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com |
|
Imports Plus
Brothel of Slating Intellectual Lusts
96
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:26:00 -
[171] - Quote
I wont pretend to know how to accomplish this but the primary issues seem to be:
1. Make a reason for them to be fielded more frequently (more than a pos bash) without going back to the days of a 40 titan blob devastating a 250 man BS fleet.
2. Let caps tackle caps. |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
922
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:31:00 -
[172] - Quote
Imports Plus wrote:I wont pretend to know how to accomplish this but the primary issues seem to be:
1. Make a reason for them to be fielded more frequently (more than a pos bash) without going back to the days of a 40 titan blob devastating a 250 man BS fleet.
2. Let caps tackle caps.
Well, sort of.
Issues are:
1. People need more of a reason to use them beyond structure bashing. "Drop them on other people's supers" is another reason, but it's always going to be a reason unless their offensive capabilities are removed entire.
2. Supercaps are devilishly hard to actually pin down. Part of that is due to a willingness to sacrifice an entire support fleet to scrape off the only ships able to tackle them.
And so proposed solutions are:
1: ??? Lots of talk about increasing or changing role, nothing firm.
2: Let caps (or dreads with a special module, or whatever) tackle supers. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
CataCourier
Asha' Man Corp
11
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:40:00 -
[173] - Quote
corestwo wrote:2: Let caps (or dreads with a special module, or whatever) tackle supers.
Aren't dreads susceptible to EWAR? There would need to be a preventative measure to keep them from being quickly target jammed as soon as they tried to lock down a super.
|
Sofia Wolf
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
72
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:46:00 -
[174] - Quote
IDK if I like the tone of the report. It leaves me with GÇ£**** empire space, 0.0 is only thing importantGÇ¥ after-taste. I find it quite dishonest to claim that empire space is more profitable then 0.0 space. This is simply not true, unless one counts market speculation and trading, but I don't think those should count.
And despite their focus on 0.0 as on most important part of the game they ignored 2 biggest problems of 0.0 space: blobbing and fact that something like 2 to 4 (depending on how one counts) mega coalitions control all of sov space in 0.0 and that nobody that is unwilling to suckup to handful of oligarchs running those coalitions has any place in sov 0.0. Both of those problems are consequence of excessive speed of travel in 0.0. It takes about as much time to transit from one corner of 0.0 to another in carrier blob as it takes to transit from one corner of empire space to another in interceptor.. If one is serious about improving 0.0 he must first deal with mechanic that make fast travel in that space possible: cyno, jump bridges and titan bridging.
That said there are some proposals that I like: Farms and Fields sov mechanics, diversifying 0.0 (although I donGÇÖt know why CSM thins this should be exclusive to 0.0 alone, any part of New Eden could benefit from that), Standings and the Map (UI) , and Breaking Mineral Compression. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3345
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:46:00 -
[175] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote: You just need to impose maintenance costs for the owner of a supercapital ship, these costs should be considerable and comparable to the production costs. I'll present the draft of this mechanics, but I dont insist it should be exactly as I say - just to give a general idea.
You say this as if $15 or 600 million for a PLEX every month isn't a high enough maintenance cost.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1451
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 20:47:00 -
[176] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Sinzor Aumer wrote: You just need to impose maintenance costs for the owner of a supercapital ship, these costs should be considerable and comparable to the production costs. I'll present the draft of this mechanics, but I dont insist it should be exactly as I say - just to give a general idea. You say this as if $15 or 600 million for a PLEX every month isn't a high enough maintenance cost. There's an echo in here.
Amarr Militia |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3345
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 21:19:00 -
[177] - Quote
That's what I get for not hitting refresh before posting. Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2094
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 21:22:00 -
[178] - Quote
Why would someone only have one character on an account? Why would only Titan piloting accounts be considered to be paying an "upkeep" of an account subscription?
I disbelieve.
Here's what actually happens: you have accounts that have titan flying pilots on them. In some cases, that is in fact the only viable character on the account, and the account is shared by an alliance (because why spend the money on a Titan when the player is only on two hours a day, four days a week?). In other cases, there are one or two other characters on the account: for example a hisec ice mining alt and a destroyer-flying ganking alt, which are perfectly usable for those times when the player (who is GÇö incredibly GÇö the only user of the account) doesn't want to be a titan.
The argument that the upkeep for a Titan pilot is 1 PLEX a month is bogus to start with: all accounts cost that kind of upkeep, even the new player who has just started and can only fly frigates with poor tank and DPS has to pay for that account somehow.
A Faction Warfare alt costs more "upkeep" than a Titan flying alt, because the FW alt will lose ships and need to replace them. The Titan/Supercarrier alt isn't losing ships.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
2095
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 21:41:00 -
[179] - Quote
Noisrevbus wrote:Mara Rinn wrote:Or allowing logistics to repair HICs? Tackle dreads might be worthwhile if there was a capital tackle module whose only purpose was to prevent jump drives from functioning. Logistics can already repair HICs, you just have to operate in tandem with other HIC to maintain points - which makes for a more complex and interesting tactical situation. We don't want the game dumbed down further where more HICs survive and less people commit SC. The questions seem to operate under the assumption that SC rarely die because they have too easy a time to escape, while in reality SC "rarely" die because as with everything else there's little incentive to commit them from an unfavourable position.
So we can already tackle capitals and supercapitals with HICs, and HICs can be repaired (when they don't have their infinite point active), why do we need (super)capitals to be able to tackle supercapitals? Is this just a wish from dreadnought pilots wanting to have something worthwhile to do with their dreadnoughts?
I wonder if the real reason that supercapitals aren't dying is simply that there are no fights important enough to win that they're worth sacrificing super-expensive ships for? Or is the reason more likely to be that noone wants to escalate a supercapital fight because the only people currently using supercapitals have such vastly superior numbers that anyone else using supercapitals is going to have their supercapitals effortlessly removed from space?
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
922
|
Posted - 2012.11.20 22:35:00 -
[180] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:Why would someone only have one character on an account? Why would only Titan piloting accounts be considered to be paying an "upkeep" of an account subscription?
Someone might want to come to fleet ops in a regular ship while they dawdle in their titan, which means two accounts, an extra account which they might not actually have.
Most super pilots also tend to maintain their own network of cyno and scout alts too, for that matter.
Sofia Wolf wrote:IDK if I like the tone of the report. It leaves me with GÇ£**** empire space, 0.0 is only thing importantGÇ¥ after-taste. I find it quite dishonest to claim that empire space is more profitable then 0.0 space. This is simply not true, unless one counts market speculation and trading, but I don't think those should count. I don't think anyone is saying that empire space is unimportant and indeed many things in this would likely be a boon to empire as well. What's being said is that null has been neglected for quite some time and has glaring structural issues that have been unaddressed throughout the entire game.
Sofia Wolf wrote:And despite their focus on 0.0 as on most important part of the game they ignored 2 biggest problems of 0.0 space: blobbing and fact that something like 2 to 4 (depending on how one counts) mega coalitions control all of sov space in 0.0 and that nobody that is unwilling to suckup to handful of oligarchs running those coalitions has any place in sov 0.0. Large coalitions have existed in the past and often throughout the entire game. The old "Southern Coalition" of Lokta Volterra, Veritas Immortalis and KOS numbered some ten thousand players, for example. The old "Northern Coalition" in all its myriad incarnations was similarly sized. Two things have changed. First, the servers have grown and been refined to actually allow players to work together (or against each other) in increasingly large numbers. No one wants to revert this. And second, the out-of-game coordination and infrastructure supporting these coalitions has grown increasingly more sophisticated, something CCP can't do anything about anyway.
Sofia Wolf wrote:Both of those problems are consequence of excessive speed of travel in 0.0. It takes about as much time to transit from one corner of 0.0 to another in carrier blob as it takes to transit from one corner of empire space to another in interceptor.. If one is serious about improving 0.0 he must first deal with mechanic that make fast travel in that space possible: cyno, jump bridges and titan bridging. Uh...based on your extensive, what, 16 months of playing this game wherein you've played with such carrier blob using superstars as "Ubuntu Inc" that would qualify you to actually say something like this?
Look. Goons conquered everything from Scalding Pass to Detorid before jump bridges and titan bridges ever existed, with just very dedicated carrier pilot or two doing out logistics. The argument that players can only conquer and hold large amounts of space because of titan bridges, jump bridges and cynos is laughable
Mara Rinn wrote: I wonder if the real reason that supercapitals aren't dying is simply that there are no fights important enough to win that they're worth sacrificing super-expensive ships for? Or is the reason more likely to be that noone wants to escalate a supercapital fight because the only people currently using supercapitals have such vastly superior numbers that anyone else using supercapitals is going to have their supercapitals effortlessly removed from space?
A recent (within the past month, I'm having trouble finding news coverage) fight between SOLAR and RA that escalated to include HBC and others joining in on both sides featured over a hundred supers on the field and many hundreds of other players on both sides.
A total of 7 supers died, and for that type of engagement that's actually exceptional. This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
fofofo |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |