| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
215
   |
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:41:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm not generally a fan of buzzwords, but at least it looks like you're using your own for this one 
Regarding the idea of helping players decide what to do next, It's worth considering whether the current game design for PVE content is a good one; a lot of it is hidden away, and discovering (or re-discovering) that content creates a barrier between different groups of players. I don't believe this is a good design, and it might be worth reconsidering the design of EVE's exploration content to make, at least some of it, more obvious in space. |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
215
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:that is a terrible idea
things being discoverable is neat
Yes, things being discoverable is neat, but what should be the threshold for having to find content? Should you have to launch a probe every time you enter a system to find if there's any content at all? Maybe it would be better if the solar system map showed you a rough indicator of what PvE content is available before you launch any probes.
I'm not against leaving really neat stuff buried far away, so long as it doesn't create an unnecessarily large barrier between players. As things are currently designed, ESPECIALLY when it comes to basic ship blasting PVE, I think this barrier is too large.
|
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
215
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:How is this different from the "Jesus Features" that CCP vowed to never do again? Just smaller stuff under one common theme? What if a theme needs a really big change to make worthwhile? Nice to see you supporting the Enablers, although I prefer the term Makers and Breakers. 
I like the term Makers and Breakers too; I just wish the interdependency of the two groups was more apparent; the eve market has the unfortunate side effect of obfuscating the relationship. |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
215
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 19:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
Seleene wrote:JON LANDER I WANT YOU TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF SOMETHING!!!!! Also, the CSM minutes will be published in the next 24-48 hours. We've been waiting on this dev blog.
What is Jon Lander taking on instead of Senior Production, anyway?
Glad to hear the CSM meeting minutes will be out soonGäó
|
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
215
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
arcca jeth wrote:sounds like it's time for new content that you "abandoned", oh say about a year or so ago. Give us another small piece of the WIS pie for starters, remember WIS was YOUR idea and vision CCP and you suckered in a lot of subs with those fancy videos you put out to promote WIS. additionally, I'd like for industry at POS's in 0.0 and low sec to have bonuses and benefits that exceed those of high sec. No, please do not touch high-sec industry, just buff the POS bonuses to be worth something. This is NOT that hard and some people will be very happy to see this improved.
POSes are very expensive to operate and should provide solid utility value for their cost, but I fundamentally disagree with the idea of leaving highsec industry completely alone. I don't suggest nerfing refining manufacturing slots or refining percentages per se, though making the standard for refining amounts 35%, rather than 50%, might not be the worst idea ever conceived. Highly skilled players will still be able to reach 100% net yields. But, I prefer another option.
In the current game design, refining is a free action; it takes no time, and is probably a relic of vendor trash RPG design. Instead of the action being immediate, why not modify refineries to work like the assembly lines do, with a set amount of time to perform each act of refining and reprocessing? Not only would this create a new way to make 0.0 and lowsec better (more abundant and or faster slots), but it would also help address the issues in mineral compression.
|
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
216
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 20:42:00 -
[6] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Uh, POS do offer solid value for their cost.
33% increase in production volume isn't value?
Do you think that's enough?
Is their refining capacity where it should be? Do they provide an adequate storage solution to people trying to live out of them?
|
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
216
|
Posted - 2013.01.15 22:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Seagull wrote:Solosky wrote:Quote:we are going into a pre-production phase for the summer expansion of EVE Online, where we establish what the theme will be and what features and changes will be part of that theme. We will involve the CSM in this process TL;DR no new content for hi-sec. We listen in many places and to lots of data, and no single stakeholder (including the internal ones) gets to define the agenda. The CSM notes from the "Second Decade" session from the summit will have some more detail on how I see what we should do - keep an eye out for that one.
I don't think high-sec is hurting for location specific content as it is. |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent
216
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 00:17:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:"Meaningful" to whom? To players who already fit into EVE and need no new gameplay to keep playing for years, or to players who could fit and subscribe forever if they were offered something else?
EVE is a massive universe, but it haves no room for casual players who can't compromise nor to solo players who fail at socializing.
You can't add that to FiS. WiS is the only chance that the misfits find a place in EVE without spoiling it to the rest.
I would like to see something happen with Incarna as well, but you are not making a convincing case; you're just complaining about how terrible EVE is going to remain until you get the walking in stations system that you want. I will not be easily convinced, nor hopefully anyone in charge at CCP, that now is the time to make such technical investments. What vision are they supposed to work towards? What are the features supposed to do? How is it supposed to make the Eve Universe bigger and better for new and old players alike? Until someone can answer those questions legitimately, while working within the confines of available resources so that CCP's Flying in Space investments and investment capabilities will not be compromised, CCP should not be adding any WiS features. |
| |
|