|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
15
   |
Posted - 2013.01.17 17:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Unfortunately I don't think pitchforks and rage will change Unifex's opinion on this. . . . . . . Data on the other hand is a much better tool to get the general point across.
For CCP: What metric did Unifex/Seagull/Ripley/Soundwave use to come to the conclusion that the major POS work would effect a small number of people?
For Players: What kind of metric do you think would show CCP how important changing the state of POSes is?
|
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
16
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 17:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Ayeson wrote:Cid Tazer wrote:Unfortunately I don't think pitchforks and rage will change Unifex's opinion on this. . . . . . . Data on the other hand is a much better tool to get the general point across.
For CCP: What metric did Unifex/Seagull/Ripley/Soundwave use to come to the conclusion that the major POS work would effect a small number of people?
For Players: What kind of metric do you think would show CCP how important changing the state of POSes is?
I HOPE twelve hundred posts in 12 hours will have more weight on his opinion than you think.
That's not really hard data and 1200 posts means nothing if they are from 20 people.
Number of towers per corp would be a metric, number of hours involved in doing simple pos tasks, number of characters that are involved in accessing a pos per day. . . . . . . those are the metrics that I think will mean more than forum posts. |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
17
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 17:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
mynnna wrote:Cid Tazer wrote:Ayeson wrote:Cid Tazer wrote:Unfortunately I don't think pitchforks and rage will change Unifex's opinion on this. . . . . . . Data on the other hand is a much better tool to get the general point across.
For CCP: What metric did Unifex/Seagull/Ripley/Soundwave use to come to the conclusion that the major POS work would effect a small number of people?
For Players: What kind of metric do you think would show CCP how important changing the state of POSes is?
I HOPE twelve hundred posts in 12 hours will have more weight on his opinion than you think. That's not really hard data and 1200 posts means nothing if they are from 20 people. Number of towers per corp would be a metric, number of hours involved in doing simple pos tasks, number of characters that are involved in accessing a pos per day. . . . . . . those are the metrics that I think will mean more than forum posts. Those are poor metrics, because POS are in many ways so broken that all but the most masochistic of enablers and instigators work with them, on behalf of everyone else. That's something CCP can change.
Conversely, if you have say 5 characters maintaining 1000 poses because they are the only masochistic people in the corp, that tells you something as well. |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
17
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 18:12:00 -
[4] - Quote
Besides the obvious changes to POS management and roles, I think that making some structures related to moon mining/reactions/industry that can be disabled for 6 or 12 hours before they self rep would be really cool. Something that has a relatively small amount of HP or a 5 min timer w/ a hacking module to disable would be great for roaming gangs to hit in nullsec. Who wouldn't want to be able to disable some Goon or PL tech moons for a few hours? I'm sure there are problems with this kind of idea, but it would give small gangs something to do. |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 14:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:Jada Maroo wrote:Some of you are so easily pacified. None of what Seagull said changed their direction in any way. All Seagull did was explain some comments.
You're still not getting a POS revamp this year. It was never going to be an easy one release feature. Personally, I thought they would have been done with prototyping by now and would have announced a two year release schedule. Instead, we find out that its big and scary and they haven't put it on the schedule yet.
It looks like they picked out the part that wouldn't be touching any other game systems to prototype which does make some sense. But game design has a mountain of work ahead (which I hope they undertake soon) to figure out how they want POS's to work with industry, logistics, travel, inventory, etc. |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 14:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
Rees Noturana wrote:There is so much potential to make this happen incrementally, but the overall design plan needs to be in place so they don't build themselves into a corner.
Release 1: Home Sweet Home. Player owned structures.
Release 2: New industry. Corporate. Take over for research and manufacturing starbases.
Release 3: Sovereignty. Capital building, jump bridges, iHubs.
The only problem is reliving the CQ fiasco. If players don't see game play in the first release then we'll never make it to the second.
I don't think this kind of plan is the most desireable way to go due to not fixing the functionality that is already there but very painful to use. I'd go with something more like:
Point Release 1: Rework POS interactions with inventory, corp roles, POS gunnery
Point Release 2: Rework POS interaction with industry (to coincide with work on manufacturing/research UI work in general)
Point Release 3: Rework POS interactions with SOV structures
Point Release 4: Release new pos creation system
Point Release 5: New pos structures |
Cid Tazer
The Green Cross
Against ALL Anomalies
22
|
Posted - 2013.01.21 15:12:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:Cid Tazer wrote:
I don't think this kind of plan is the most desireable way to go due to not fixing the functionality that is already there but very painful to use. I'd go with something more like:
Point Release 1: Rework POS interactions with inventory, corp roles, POS gunnery
Point Release 2: Rework POS interaction with industry (to coincide with work on manufacturing/research UI work in general)
Point Release 3: Rework POS interactions with SOV structures
Point Release 4: Release new pos creation system
Point Release 5: New pos structures
The problem with a plan like this is that it's missing the very large chunk of work/code that is needed to re-work the current code base to allow the changes. Like many other 'early' features in EvE, POSes are based on code tweaked into doing stuff it wasn't coded for, and made to work a lot of voodoo and other practices of dark arts. A splash of new paint and some go-faster stripes will not help when the problem is deep in core functionality. CCP is well aware of the work needed, and that they have to dig down and do it right, which will take time and resources.
Actually I was trying to take that into account with the first 3 releases by having them rework the interactions that were the old spaghetti code and current functionality that we like what we can do but hate how we have to do it. |
|
|
| |
|