Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |

Doctor Garamond Trebuchet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:34:00 -
[151] - Quote
Insane Randomness wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote:What, no blackops buff? It's a travesty, I tell you... a travesty! Give em credit mate. Where it's due, seriously. Hybrid buff? Hells yeah! Assault ship bonus! WEWT! It's like they're finally listening.
Actually they said 'balancing' let's not "buff" into that. It could just mean reducing the cap usage (which would be a hell of an improvement/start)
Blaster damage may be toned down in fact, but if they increase the range to something equal/exceeding projectile (you would think they would go longer than projectiles based on how they are launched right?)
I'm just not ready to believe they are being buffed. My T2 blaster spec train pain won't go away that easily.  @rickypedia | official #tweetfleet list manager - just post to #tweetfleet to be added-á message me here or ingame if I somehow miss you. Yes I'm in an npc corp on purpose, its a CAS history thing Yes I live in nullsec. |

Viribus
Bear Force One Elite Space Guild
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:36:00 -
[152] - Quote
Henriette Malia Alette wrote:And.. AGAIN its PVP that gets some fixing.. if its not PVP, its Null... hey - dev's.. gues what.. there are actually spaceship that ISNT PVP... *OMGOSH* surprise i guess.. so.. when can we expect to see some fixes to Industrual Spaceships.. like.. the Orca... "hint" for a fleet mate not in corp to use a orca, u need to configure it each time u leave a station/jump a gate *DOH*
And lets not mention the "new feature" added in latest updates - the auto-close window of the Ore-hold when u undock.. excellent feature.. what's its use anyway.. it only holds 50 K ore.
Then we have the wish for a Gas mining ship on one side, and the utterly useless, thow rather cute Procurer... and the list goes on.. but i guess thats not really relevant, as im still to see a single GM/Dev to step up and admit that he has a industrial alt, and never PVP/are in Null - and are proud of it.. Somewhre on the line - the GMs and devs of this game went off track, when they all tend to be focused on PVP/Null - and ignoring prolly a very large part of this game.. the PVE Industrial.. go figure.. And no.. fixing 1 indy thing, each time u fix 100 pvp thing, or add 50 new things to null, isnt good enuff, and its certainly not focusing on us that are NOT interested in PVP, Not interestd in Low Sec, NOT interested in Null sec..
And off i go..
Industry ships aren't cripplingly imbalanced |

Anvil44
Independent Traders and Builders MPA
14
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:36:00 -
[153] - Quote
LakeEnd wrote:Thanks for this CCP, you-¦ve restored my faith in the game, hopefully the hope is not misplaced.
If I could make one wish, to complemented the great things you-¦ve already have planned, is to give us new T3 ship class to play with. T3 frigates, T3 battleships or even T3 carriers would surely keep us busy, same way as T3 cruisers have for this long.
Heck, even T3 mining ships would be interesting...but ideally, making T3 subsystems swappable at a POS! This would increase the fun factor in unknown space for regular occupiers and those that prey on the occupiers. Would make having a T3 ship much more useful in unknown space too.
|

RavenNyx
The Cursed Navy Important Internet Spaceship League
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:36:00 -
[154] - Quote
Zulu - I've been giving you a hard time... Though you derserved it everything you got, your promises are tantilizing and you should get praize for good, forward and honest communication with the community :)
This is very good news, and though I'm too much of a cynic to get my hopes up too high, I will stick around and see where this train is heading. |

Raivi
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:36:00 -
[155] - Quote
Excellent devblog.
I agree with what others before me have said about being careful not to bite off more than you can chew. Don't try to do a full rework of factional warfare between now and Christmas for instance (although by all means go after any low hanging fruit related to it you can find). Looking forward to more blogs with info on the specific changes, but what I would really like to see is a blog describing the personel shuffling that's been done to get these extra resources aimed at FiS.
Thank you very very much for making the CSM a part of the blog process. As this thread shows, taking time to solicit feedback and get it right will generate a very different community reaction than what earlier blogs recieved. |

Fipio
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:37:00 -
[156] - Quote
@CCP ZULU So with the new expansion we will see the new null/economy changes? Cos i know you said something about EvE returning to its original roots. Any info regarding this? |

Komen
Capital Enrichment Services
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:38:00 -
[157] - Quote
CCP wrote:Hybrid weapons balancing
Factional warfare
Assault ships
Capital ship balancing
New T2 modules
Starbase logistics management
New EWAR-Drones
T2 Rigs manufacturing
Ship spinning
New font
More captains quarters
Time dilation
Got it, you're iterating and working on balancing and bringing forward existing features. I'm sure the guys in my corp will be happy with POS logistics improvements, assuming you actually do simplify and ease that part of the game. The rest of it looks alright.
Also Ship Spinning: A) should never have been removed. Shame on you for your hubris. (yes, I've read Hilmar's apology, it is accepted, for what it's worth). B) is a ******** feature name, I like 'Hangar View' just fine. C) needs to show other players docked ships. That would just liven up the space so much, the old hangars (pre-Trinity) had visible docking pads for several ships. I always wanted to see other ships entering and leaving. Heck, even if they were just on a script and not representative of players. |

Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
88
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:39:00 -
[158] - Quote
I agree, but still finish Incarna.  |

Grytok
KL0NKRIEGER
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:39:00 -
[159] - Quote
All nice and dandy, but it still isn't enough to even consider reactivating my accounts and start taking part in 0.0 again.
Call me when you're going to heavily revamp sovereignity, capitals, jumpbridges, jumpfreighters, moonminerals and true-sec to allow for small entities in 0.0 again. Only balancing supers doesn't help to fix the clusterfuck. |

Antal Marius
Allied Operations Jokers Wild.
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:42:00 -
[160] - Quote
Komen wrote: C) needs to show other players docked ships. That would just liven up the space so much, the old hangars (pre-Trinity) had visible docking pads for several ships. I always wanted to see other ships entering and leaving. Heck, even if they were just on a script and not representative of players.
How about if it showed some of the other ships we ourselves had in that station? |

JitaPriceChecker2
State War Academy Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:42:00 -
[161] - Quote
CCP you must add one thing to the list, it is crucial .
TECHNETIUM.
Otherwise its OK. |

MeBiatch
Republic University Minmatar Republic
28
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:43:00 -
[162] - Quote
this is the hybrid fix you are looking for:
MeBiatch wrote:here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase base tracking by 15% 4. Increase falloff by 50%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase falloff by 50%
ammo:
Simular boost that projectile ammo got
concept choice between what damage type you want to do between thermal and Kinetic (i.e. antimater does 80% thermal damage 20% kin damage, uranium does 80% kin damage and 20% thermal damage)
also include a tracking bonus built into the ammo
Caldari boost: remove the optimal range bonus for hybrid turrets and replace with a rate of fire bonus
gallente boost: remove the falloff bonus and replace with a mass reduction bonus
change the internal rep bonus to include a bonus incomming remote rep
General fix: change the speed reduction affect on armor rigs and replace with an agility reduction change reload time from 10 seconds to 5 seconds
|

Fracture Antollare
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:46:00 -
[163] - Quote
Can we get updates to the list as they're made? I'd be excited to see separate posts linked to the list here on subjects yet to be addressed in-depth (hotlink the post like you did for ship spinning/ new font/ time dilation). |

Herping yourDerp
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
104
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:47:00 -
[164] - Quote
now that your head is out of your ass maybe we can get on with EvE being a good game. i'm willing to overlook CCP's failures if it doesnt happen again. |

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE Limitless Inc.
127
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:48:00 -
[165] - Quote
I hate to sound like an old door or a stuck taperecorder, but Zulu; 13 days. How can you accept a working environment where you give promises, then two weeks of purely insults and silence, just to be followed up by :words: and no content? I would feel sorry for you, but you could've had some integrity and put the foot down. And most of all, you could've avoided insulting the playerbase.
The CSM and former CCP employees usually have mainly good words about you. But your public posting is beyond horrendous.
This blog is one of those standard 'intent'-blogs we expect from you guys, but we havn't seen any progression at all, yet. Until you guys (the staff at CCP) stop lying, stop the silent treatment, stop running past CSM (and at the same time try to use "we ran this by CSM" in some cases, while in others you ignore them), stop insulting and attacking players on forums, stop banning people you have a grief with (even tho they havn't broken any EULA or forum related rules, i.e. t20, Helicity, etc), and most importantly: goes back to developing the dangerous space-MMO we used to play; we have no reason to feel anything but distrust and disgust.
Your list of Winter Expansion goals btw, it sound awfully populistic (hybrids, AF's, Capital Ships, t2 modules, could use improvement but isn't gamebreaking), the only big real fix there seems to be starbase logistics management. You didn't mention either of some major PvP buffs you could do: 1) completely removing 'upgraded systems' for sov nullsec, as it just blobs people in one system rather than spreading them out. 2) highsec being way too safe, and in many means really easy to dodge wardecs by repeatedly jumping corp, where's the dangerous EVE we had the first five years? 3) means to attracts players to low- and nullsec rathern than keeping them in high in the first place 4) nullsec logistics being way too easy and safe, jumpbridges among the real big pvp killers
Those are some major concepts that would have alot more impact on PvP then either of the stuff you mentioned in the blog. Your choices are pure populist choices, and the real core PvP issues (small- and medium scale, and in a sense easy-access, PvP being irrelevant and overlooked for years and years) are not even looked at.
And the safety in highsec, combined with the reluctance of forcing people out of high-, just makes :tinfoil:-rabble-folks like me wonder if you are more keen to keep the subscriptions of carebears (who break the economy btw, producing way more than they are losing and plowing isk into the market from their PvE activities) than to actually maintain a functioning ship- and market PvP. And in a longer timeframe: the game as a whole. Hilmar, Zulu, Soundwave: We care about our hobby. Do you care about your jobs? |

Komen
Capital Enrichment Services
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:50:00 -
[166] - Quote
Antal Marius wrote:Komen wrote: C) needs to show other players docked ships. That would just liven up the space so much, the old hangars (pre-Trinity) had visible docking pads for several ships. I always wanted to see other ships entering and leaving. Heck, even if they were just on a script and not representative of players. How about if it showed some of the other ships we ourselves had in that station?
Hmmm, and then we could click on THOSE ships, just as we can the one we occupy, and mess with modules and cargo...without actually swapping in.
Oh, that's just too fine an idea.
|

Immortal DeathKnight
The Shadow Plague Gentlemen's Agreement
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:56:00 -
[167] - Quote
normally i do not even enter on forum, but i must say i like the changes and that you are actually doing something beneficial to the eve players
just my 2 cents: dust 512 or whatever is called will be a fail also the other vampire game ? lol ? is not even worth mentioning |

Komen
Capital Enrichment Services
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:57:00 -
[168] - Quote
Misanth wrote:I hate to sound like an old door or a stuck taperecorder, but Zulu; 13 days. How can you accept a working environment where you give promises, then two weeks of purely insults and silence, just to be followed up by :words: and no content? I would feel sorry for you, but you could've had some integrity and put the foot down. And most of all, you could've avoided insulting the playerbase.
The CSM and former CCP employees usually have mainly good words about you. But your public posting is beyond horrendous.
This blog is one of those standard 'intent'-blogs we expect from you guys, but we havn't seen any progression at all, yet. Until you guys (the staff at CCP) stop lying, stop the silent treatment, stop running past CSM (and at the same time try to use "we ran this by CSM" in some cases, while in others you ignore them), stop insulting and attacking players on forums, stop banning people you have a grief with (even tho they havn't broken any EULA or forum related rules, i.e. t20, Helicity, etc), and most importantly: goes back to developing the dangerous space-MMO we used to play; we have no reason to feel anything but distrust and disgust.
Your list of Winter Expansion goals btw, it sound awfully populistic (hybrids, AF's, Capital Ships, t2 modules, could use improvement but isn't gamebreaking), the only big real fix there seems to be starbase logistics management. You didn't mention either of some major PvP buffs you could do: 1) completely removing 'upgraded systems' for sov nullsec, as it just blobs people in one system rather than spreading them out. 2) highsec being way too safe, and in many means really easy to dodge wardecs by repeatedly jumping corp, where's the dangerous EVE we had the first five years? 3) means to attracts players to low- and nullsec rathern than keeping them in high in the first place 4) nullsec logistics being way too easy and safe, jumpbridges among the real big pvp killers
Those are some major concepts that would have alot more impact on PvP then either of the stuff you mentioned in the blog. Your choices are pure populist choices, and the real core PvP issues (small- and medium scale, and in a sense easy-access, PvP being irrelevant and overlooked for years and years) are not even looked at.
And the safety in highsec, combined with the reluctance of forcing people out of high-, just makes :tinfoil:-rabble-folks like me wonder if you are more keen to keep the subscriptions of carebears (who break the economy btw, producing way more than they are losing and plowing isk into the market from their PvE activities) than to actually maintain a functioning ship- and market PvP. And in a longer timeframe: the game as a whole.
I don't agree entirely with your changes, BUT I like where your focus is. On the other hand, I also would like to see assault ships and hybrids get some love (personal bias, since I've invested however many SP on Gallente ships and weapons).
CCPers have said that a null-sec revamp is being worked on, will take some time, and no-doubt will include a proper roll for jump-bridges and capitals and supers and freighters. One would hope they'd tackle low-sec at the same time, not to add complexity but actually to reduce it.
Anyways, still in wait-and-see mode. |

Gealbhan
38
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:58:00 -
[169] - Quote
It will be interesting to see how all this pans out. I'm not dismissing CCP's efforts or jumping out of my chair with excitement. I'm one of those "wait and see" people.
I am very interested and watching all developments closely, though. |

Jita Alt666
310
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 19:58:00 -
[170] - Quote
Excellent - My faith in CCP's understanding about how things should be has been restored. However - This is one of the times I shall watch what CCP do and not what they say. There appears to be a renewed commitment to Eve Online by CCP. Please make sure your get this one right.
|

Dark Angelis
Tedium Partners
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:00:00 -
[171] - Quote
how bout you add balancing moon goo throughout the regions and nerfing russian RMT and botting? |

Varesk
Maelstrom Crew
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:00:00 -
[172] - Quote
The 5th subsystem for t3 ships would be nice.
|

Asadura
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:00:00 -
[173] - Quote
Only thing missing from that list is more T3 |

Ponder Yonder
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:01:00 -
[174] - Quote
I approve of this endeavour.
-- Fly Reckless |

Iosue
Black Sky Hipsters
7
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:01:00 -
[175] - Quote
please follow through CCP; this all sounds very promising. though not gonna get too happy until we see some results. i like the direction and momentum though. |

Varesk
Maelstrom Crew
21
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:02:00 -
[176] - Quote
Dark Angelis wrote:how bout you add balancing moon goo throughout the regions and nerfing RMT and botting? Also can you add a dislike button so people can dislike my biased post.
Please be fair about this, Every Null Sec alliance has botters so I fixed your post.
|

Red Teufel
Blackened Skies THE UNTHINKABLES
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:05:00 -
[177] - Quote
fixing the black ops would require all ships related to black ops. so i expect a patch eventually purely dedicated to just that. pull this off ccp and it will be the first time i actualy will not be dissapointed with you. |

Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:05:00 -
[178] - Quote
OMG. Very much yes. Guess I'll have to dust off my Gallente ships... oh wait I've been flying them all this time.
And can we possibly get Asuka Solo's PI rework put in there, somewhere? We have a blog, it is terrible. How to fix Bounty Hunting |

DON HONDURAS
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:08:00 -
[179] - Quote
When are we going to be able to interact with other people in Incarna, play poker or whatever? |

Grimpak
Midnight Elites Echelon Rising
64
|
Posted - 2011.10.05 20:11:00 -
[180] - Quote
wait, new Ewar drones? you mean med and light web drones? or making all the non ECM drones suck less? or both?
also, touching on FW? who are you and what have you done with CCP?
and:
MeBiatch wrote:this is the hybrid fix you are looking for: MeBiatch wrote:here are the fixes for hybrids:
blasters:
concept shotguns (short range arties...)
1. Increase base damage by 50% 2. Decrease rate of fire by 30% 3. Increase base tracking by 15% 4. Increase falloff by 50%
railguns: Concept long range auto cannons
1. Increase base damage by 15% 2. Increase rate of fire by 15% 3. decrease activation cost by 40% 4. increase falloff by 50%
ammo:
Simular boost that projectile ammo got
concept choice between what damage type you want to do between thermal and Kinetic (i.e. antimater does 80% thermal damage 20% kin damage, uranium does 80% kin damage and 20% thermal damage)
also include a tracking bonus built into the ammo
Caldari boost: remove the optimal range bonus for hybrid turrets and replace with a rate of fire bonus
gallente boost: remove the falloff bonus and replace with a mass reduction bonus
change the internal rep bonus to include a bonus incomming remote rep
General fix: change the speed reduction affect on armor rigs and replace with an agility reduction change reload time from 10 seconds to 5 seconds
I like the rail one, but on blasters I would boost damage considerable, boost tracking moderately and cut falloff and optimal further instead. Blasters shouldn't have any kind of method of damage projection themselves, this stat should be provided by the ship where they are fitted. The ammo changes, while making it a wee bit too "projectile" also have a stint of uniqueness. However, after this, the lasers would need a similar change. [img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]
[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 .. 18 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |