Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tei Lin
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
94
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 22:22:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:The next issue on TreborGÇÖs list was terrain. That is to say, the notion that some places should be harder to get to and easier to defend, with the tradeoff possibly being less value. Trebor argued that one should not simply be able to GÇ£cyno around the bastionGÇ¥. Trebor continued by arguing that in the current state terrain is GÇ£flatGÇ¥, and all places are equally easy to get. In TreborGÇÖs view, force projection should have more strategic consequences than it does now instead of traveling a few regions away and coming back GÇ£in time for teaGÇ¥.
Quote:Trebor added that it could in fact be a soft cap that increased (or decreased) depending on a variety of metrics. Using a hypothetical example of how such a feature could be used, Trebor brought up Titans and Supercaps in general. Using this type of soft-cap mechanic, Trebor suggested that to build a new supercap would require the GÇ£coreGÇ¥ of a dead supercap. So to build a new ship you would need the same materials and time, but also a supercap GÇ£coreGÇ¥ that has a chance of dropping after a ship is destroyed. With that plus an adjustable drop rate of the cores in rare NPC spawns, one could manipulate the population of the ships. Two step liked the idea and talked about the issue of difficulty scaling; accumulating resources shouldnGÇÖt universally make everything easier.
Anyone who's played in nullsec or been a part of any strategic sov war knows why these two statements are so disjointed from reality it's jarring. |
Arkon Olacar
Imperial Guardians Tribal Band
193
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 22:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Dear god, what a terrible publord, how the hell did this guy get on the csm... "The rest will be in the blog rather than invented at the keyboards of forum posters and bloggers." -á-á-á-á-á-á-á - CCP Sreegs, 23/06/2012
Umad forum warriors? |
Faife
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
92
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 22:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
i like the part where he thinks that limiting supercaps won't mean that we have all of them anyways.
except under his plan, no one will EVER have supercaps except for us. so yeah, i'm all for it. |
Ataxia Fera
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 22:31:00 -
[4] - Quote
It doesn't even require having played in nullsec to see why the supercap point is dumb; if you're trying to stop blobs of supercaps, limiting new groups from acquiring them is literally the worst thing you can do, as it only promotes the current hierarchy. |
Arronicus
Vintas Industries Mistakes Were Made.
66
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 22:38:00 -
[5] - Quote
"Let's restrict supercaps. Instead of having them built purely by a resource accessible to everyone, and competitively traded based on its value in other products, lets introduce a new drop, that is used for nothing else, so only the super rich alliances can afford to fly supers, and any less wealthy groups have to choose between a supercap, or a massive sum of isk."
Yes, what a brilliant idea. Because why should PL, Gewns, etc, have a massive super tactical advantage over most any other alliance, when they can simply buy ALL the supers?
Trebor for NOT CSM. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
98
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 04:01:00 -
[6] - Quote
interesting combination of ideas....
harder to to cyno into foreign space and limited new mommies on the server so only the haves will have them for the most part. . So if in place you could only invade say goon space at certain spots and they'd jsut load it up with mommies and support fleets for nice turkey shoots.
makes perfect sense in some alternate universe I suppose. Not sure which one though. |
Snow Axe
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
898
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 05:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Zan Shiro wrote:Not sure which one though.
The one where Trebor's ideas aren't hot garbage (aka Fantasy Land). "Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread[" |
Zol Interbottom
Nanotrasen Inc
127
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 08:05:00 -
[8] - Quote
As a High sec carebear mission runner miner and occasional PVPer, I do believe that he does not want me and my kind ever coming to null |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
863
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 08:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
trebor is simply revolting throughout the entire thing, his ideas and aspirations for eve are horrific. |
Kainotomiu Ronuken
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
652
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 09:29:00 -
[10] - Quote
TheGunslinger42 wrote:trebor is simply revolting throughout the entire thing, his ideas and aspirations for eve are horrific. Particularly the bits where he wants highsec to be 99% consensual PVP only.
Trebor wrote:There is the important word you just said GÇô mutual conflict. Just as you can have a mutual engagement between two players, you should be able to have a mutual engagement between two groups. But the current system, itGÇÖs a cursed mechanic, because most of the people who get involved want absolutely nothing to do with it. It'd kind of ruin the entire point of wardecs if you made it so that you couldn't wardec that rival mining corp who was hogging the asteroid belts in your home system, or take market PVP to the undock by wardeccing your competitors and disrupting their supply routes.
Edit: On the flip side, I'd like to say that if Alekseyev Karrde is running again, he's a pretty serious candidate for my vote, mainly because of
CSM Minutes wrote:Trebor: But as you said, 78% of wars are a bunch of people who basically want to grief a corp, a lot of times industrial corps, or corps that may be PvP corps, but they're not PvP corps in high-sec. They just use highsec for their logistics. Okay, so they get wardecced, and what happens. It just interrupts their regular game play, itGÇÖs a griefing mechanic.
Alek: God forbid you actually defend your high-sec logistics. Wow. ThatGÇÖs soooo crazy.
|
|
Vera Algaert
Republic University Minmatar Republic
683
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 11:10:00 -
[11] - Quote
I think the issue that Trebor is struggling with is that overpowered items are fun - as long as they are not overused.
Having a really powerful titan makes for a great "end-game" objective for players and alliances to work forward to and as long as it is sufficiently rare it doesn't actually matter whether the ship is imbalanced or not.
However, if one coalition can drop >50 titans in a single battle then you can no longer allow each individual titan to be overpowered without killing the game - and as a result titans end up feeling a bit lackluster.
A positive example of ships that add to the EVE experience by being ridiculously overpowered would be the alliance tournament rewards - their number is so strictly limited that they add more to the game by being overpowered, desirable and fun than they cost in terms of balance issues.
The solution Trebor proposes (actively controlling supercap proliferation by managing droprates) would imo run counter to the sandbox nature of EVE and only up being a prime example of Malcanis' Law - but I think I understand where he is coming from. I'm a NPC corp alt, any argument I make is invalid. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
299
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 19:15:00 -
[12] - Quote
I'm glad to see that what Trebor said didn't only look silly for me.
The issue is not about supercaps or caps. You can do everything to them, bigger alliances with bigger ressources will always be advantaged.
What you need to do is to modify the fesibility of things at their base. One big alliance is able to hold from 1 to infinite systems in the game. A better balance would require to proportionally reduce the possibilities, making small entities able to take and hold one or two systems while big alliances would still be able to hold whole constellations... But not 25% of the whole conquerable space ! Then you can start thinking about things like force projection, supercap balance, and so on. My best bet on this would be to design caps in a way that, in any given situation, the optimal ratio of cap : subcap in a battle would always be something like 1:20. Minimum.
As with everything, finding a good balance is not about nerfing big entities or nerfing the whole thing, it's to create a system where each size of group has it's own room, and make sure that these spaces don't step over eachothers. G££ <= Me |
Buzzy Warstl
The Strontium Asylum
445
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 20:07:00 -
[13] - Quote
Why not just make caps and supercaps *easier* to make, and introduce more lines of both?
Make nullsec shinier, then more people will care enough to fight over it. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1679
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 20:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
Tei Lin wrote:Quote:The next issue on TreborGÇÖs list was terrain. That is to say, the notion that some places should be harder to get to and easier to defend, with the tradeoff possibly being less value. Trebor argued that one should not simply be able to GÇ£cyno around the bastionGÇ¥. Trebor continued by arguing that in the current state terrain is GÇ£flatGÇ¥, and all places are equally easy to get. In TreborGÇÖs view, force projection should have more strategic consequences than it does now instead of traveling a few regions away and coming back GÇ£in time for teaGÇ¥. Quote:Trebor added that it could in fact be a soft cap that increased (or decreased) depending on a variety of metrics. Using a hypothetical example of how such a feature could be used, Trebor brought up Titans and Supercaps in general. Using this type of soft-cap mechanic, Trebor suggested that to build a new supercap would require the GÇ£coreGÇ¥ of a dead supercap. So to build a new ship you would need the same materials and time, but also a supercap GÇ£coreGÇ¥ that has a chance of dropping after a ship is destroyed. With that plus an adjustable drop rate of the cores in rare NPC spawns, one could manipulate the population of the ships. Two step liked the idea and talked about the issue of difficulty scaling; accumulating resources shouldnGÇÖt universally make everything easier. Anyone who's played in nullsec or been a part of any strategic sov war knows why these two statements are so disjointed from reality it's jarring. You should explain why, because a) not all of us are mind-readers, and b) not all of us play in nullsec or fly supercaps, but are still interested in the issues.
Amarr Militia - Fweddit - http://fweddit.com Poetic Discourse - http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.com |
Poetic Stanziel
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
1679
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 20:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Dear god, what a terrible publord, how the hell did this guy get on the csm... He sent out a couple thousand evemails in the day the polls opened.
Amarr Militia - Fweddit - http://fweddit.com Poetic Discourse - http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.com |
Kainotomiu Ronuken
694
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 20:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:You should explain why, because a) not all of us are mind-readers, and b) not all of us play in nullsec or fly supercaps, but are still interested in the issues.
Regarding the quote about supercaps, doing as Trebor suggested and having to have an item that only drops from dead supercaps or some kind of PVE content in null would mean that the only alliances with supercap fleets would be the biggest ones, only even worse than it already is. Obviously, the bigger alliances would get more PVE drops because we have more space and more pilots to farm that space, and we've also got a lot more money than any smaller alliance does, which means that it's hard for a smaller alliance to buy a supercap core (or whatever he wants to call it) from someone who is selling one, because the big alliances with the money set the price.
|
Hannah Flex
Elite Market PvP Consortium
100
|
Posted - 2013.01.18 20:47:00 -
[17] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Dear god, what a terrible publord, how the hell did this guy get on the csm...
Trebor is a member of Dirt Nap Squad- you may recall a manifesto by DNS Black the leader of Dirt Nap Squad all about how 0.0 is broken and it needs to be forcibly limited and reduced down to small-gang pvp. Bridges, titans, everything all gone. But leave blops drops alone and as a matter of fact buff blops drops because thats what DNS does.
so transparent.. |
Bijata Dolinskaja
BurgezzE.T.F
4
|
Posted - 2013.01.19 09:30:00 -
[18] - Quote
Poetic Stanziel wrote:Arkon Olacar wrote:Dear god, what a terrible publord, how the hell did this guy get on the csm... He sent out a couple thousand evemails in the day the polls opened.
Maybe somebody else should do the same and oppose every single suggestion that guy brings up. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War Out of Sight.
933
|
Posted - 2013.01.20 09:52:00 -
[19] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote: Having a really powerful titan makes for a great "end-game" objective for players and alliances to work forward to and as long as it is sufficiently rare it doesn't actually matter whether the ship is imbalanced or not.
However, if one coalition can drop >50 titans in a single battle then you can no longer allow each individual titan to be overpowered without killing the game - and as a result titans end up feeling a bit lackluster
I beg my pardon, but that's bullcrap. Exploits are bad no matter how actively they are used, once a month or daily, the same goes for imbalanced things. RMT is also relatively rare, should we tolerate it, too?
Also, the most imbalanced thing about titans has no relation to whether its being field alone or in dozens - jump bridge works with the same efficiency of free killmails generator. 14 |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
7239
|
Posted - 2013.01.20 10:36:00 -
[20] - Quote
Any balancing argument that relies on titans being rare is doomed. That horse has bolted. They're not rare, and unless CCP outright confiscate 95% them, they never will be. I doubt CCP would do anything so stupid. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread |
|
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
1648
|
Posted - 2013.01.20 10:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Any balancing argument that relies on titans being rare is doomed. That horse has bolted. They're not rare, and unless CCP outright confiscate 95% them, they never will be. I doubt CCP would do anything so stupid. They could just make them pink and add advertising on the sides for the gay and lesbian alliance. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread
|
Cyprus Black
The Learning Curve.
611
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 04:37:00 -
[22] - Quote
If you read the full paragraph, he's speaking in metaphor and talking about power projection. Some areas of space have choke points where smaller alliances could more easily defend against intruders (think 300 the movie).
With capital ship power projection, they easily bypass all choke points and natural barriers and cross vast distances within a relatively short time period.
Going to war with someone on the other side of the universe should be a major logistical undertaking. Not something trivial and so easy one could be back home in time for tea. Trolling is like art. Anyone can finger paint, but it takes true talent to create a masterpiece. |
Super spikinator
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
42
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 05:57:00 -
[23] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:If you read the full paragraph, he's speaking in metaphor and talking about power projection. Some areas of space have choke points where smaller alliances could more easily defend against intruders (think 300 the movie).
With capital ship power projection, they easily bypass all choke points and natural barriers and cross vast distances within a relatively short time period.
Going to war with someone on the other side of the universe should be a major logistical undertaking. Not something trivial and so easy one could be back home in time for tea.
How is that working out for Cobalt Edge? It fills everything you are talking about - a natural chokepoint between the drone regions and the north (Venal) that cannot be bridged out of existance, between them lies Jovian space, which cannot be accessed. A small alliance fills this chokepoint standing in between Razor alliance and Solar fleet. If Razor wanted to fight Solar they would have to cross through this, against elite pvpers who live in one of the poorest places in EvE. Ever since the drone alloy nerf there is no big ticket item to pay sov, these warrior-farmers, these men and women of thebes live by the spear and farm because that is what it takes, Cobalt edge is a place for good fights, it's denizens have never known peace. It would be the mother of all fights, maybe bloody Razor alliance enough to think twice!
Oh, they just did. How is that working out for the alliance that was there? Ah, that's right, it hasn't.
I feel sorry for Cobalt Edge. If anything it shows the problems with null more than anything else. |
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
906
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 08:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
Kainotomiu Ronuken wrote:Poetic Stanziel wrote:You should explain why, because a) not all of us are mind-readers, and b) not all of us play in nullsec or fly supercaps, but are still interested in the issues.
Regarding the quote about supercaps, doing as Trebor suggested and having to have an item that only drops from dead supercaps or some kind of PVE content in null would mean that the only alliances with supercap fleets would be the biggest ones, only even worse than it already is. Obviously, the bigger alliances would get more PVE drops because we have more space and more pilots to farm that space, and we've also got a lot more money than any smaller alliance does, which means that it's hard for a smaller alliance to buy a supercap core (or whatever he wants to call it) from someone who is selling one, because the big alliances with the money set the price.
I honestly can't think of a worse idea than trebors for "fixing" supercaps and force projection. wtf |
Da Dom
Wii R
34
|
Posted - 2013.01.23 05:54:00 -
[25] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Any balancing argument that relies on titans being rare is doomed. That horse has bolted. They're not rare, and unless CCP outright confiscate 95% them, they never will be. I doubt CCP would do anything so stupid. ...
Rebalance them to be a mobile battle POS with player hangers then...
Or has that horse been beaten to death as well? If your liberty is won by others then you are not free, you are merely protected. Your freedom is parasitic and you suck the honourable man dry. You who have enjoyed freedom, who have done nothing to earn it, your time has come. This time you will stand alone and fight for yourselves. Now you will pay for your freedom in the currency of honest toil and human blood |
Skippermonkey
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
1766
|
Posted - 2013.01.28 16:48:00 -
[26] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Dear god, what a terrible publord, how the hell did this guy get on the csm... evemail spam COME AT ME BRO
I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION |
Kalle Demos
Ironic Corp Name
85
|
Posted - 2013.01.29 14:52:00 -
[27] - Quote
There seems to be a lot of assumptions and worrying going on. I feel theres more to those quoted comments, I dont agree with them but lets be honest the 0.0 section in the CSM minutes is always "we have a problem, we know this, NEXT!". The thread you SHOULD be creating is "WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HAVE AN EXPANSION THAT FIXES 0.0?".
The sheer force of CFC / HBC / Nulli / SOlar could generate 100k posts a second, CCP will have no choice but to work on 0.0, yet this approach isnt considered and an attack on 2 pointless quotes is. You guys confuse me |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |