| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Jarod Garamonde
Action Bastards
1
   |
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:06:00 -
[91] - Quote
I've been gone for a while, so I'm just now noticing a few things.
1. Awesomesauce with the new Attack Battlecruisers. I haven't had a chance to PvP in my shiny new Talos, yet... but it seems promising. Personally, I'd have called them "Pocket Battleships", because that's kinda what they are (yes, that's a real ship type), but either way, I like it. P.S.... can we get T2 versions of those, someday? Maybe?
2. The Jukebox is gone? WTFOMGBBQ?! How am I supposed to listen to In Flames and Nightwish, while I'm playing, now?! Please bring it back!
3. The new design for the Nemesis is amazing. Good job, for certain. Now, how about making ALL the T2 ships look significantly different from their T1 counterparts?
4. I know I got rejected for this idea, in the past... but how about adding a system whereby players who took a hiatus from the game can "buy out" the skillpoints they missed out on? Like, trading a PLEX for 30 days of skilltraining (available only to players who were inactive more than a month, and limited to maybe equal to 1/3 of the time they were inactive). I know it sounds dumb, but plenty of us who couldn't help it we were gone (in my case, military service) would jump all over it. That means CCP gets more money.
Feel free to reject me, rudely. I would probably stop playing if CCP didn't abuse me, anymore. It's half the reason I even play.
But if any of these ideas sound awesome to anyone, I'd appreciate it to make up for the occasion uncalledfor abuse. |
Oracle of Machina
Legion of Darkwind
Order of the Void
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:12:00 -
[92] - Quote
Are we going to see more usability of POS's from an Alliance standpoint? Considering the fact that POS's do have alliance settings, it seems silly that you cannot have your alliance do anything with them at all. |
tofucake prime
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
77
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:12:00 -
[93] - Quote
Marianna Zydroson wrote:In the interest of making EVE more attractive to newcomers and retaining them, and the safety and protection of the Seventy Percent of residents of HighSec, I suggest the followingGǪ
1.High Sec actually becoming GÇ£High SecurityGÇ¥ and excluding Negative Security Status individuals to LowSec or NullSec to work their way back by rebuilding there security status by the prescribed ways of CCP has made available by use of Concord and Custom Security and the individual redirected in the same manner when Jita is overcrowed. This would still allow Crimes to be still commited by HighSec Security individuals only with the appropriate Security status penaltes. Gate Passage of any negative Security status individual will not be allowed and Individuals Pods or Ships will be detained at the Gate. In the Event Negative Security Status Individuals are in Station, Then the individual will be migrated to the nearest Low Sec system Station.
2.Concord to be empowered to summarily execute criminals guilty of the capital crime of podding In HighSec Regions, by executing them by elimination of their pods by weapons fire. In addition to the current practice of destroying the offending ships. Gates and Stations will deny passage of the gates or docking in stations of current criminals and suspects of Low Security Status individuals. All Funds or Transferred funds within a suitable standardized time would be use to compensate victims of cost and replacement costs of Clones, Implants, Ships and ship modules.
3.GÇ£The ScopeGÇ¥ News Service to be expanded drastically in the Captains Quarters by reporting Local, Regional and Galactic news! Including Current Events and Trends from High, Low, and Null Sec regions (Crimes and Punishment, Murders, Smuggling, etc ), Economics (Manufacturing and Production, Price Reports, Supply and Demand, etc), Traffic Conditions and Advisories, Miscellaneous announcements from CCP and Analysis of current events. This would create an informational news source to acquaint Newcomers and citizens alike.
All of your ideas are bad and you should feel bad. |
Salm0neus
Misfits United
Rough Riders.
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:16:00 -
[94] - Quote
First Question: When will there be something to counter act cloakies camping systems in null space?
Second Question: Multiperson ships... ie Titan, one person controls navigation, one controls weaponds, etc. Bonuses to more people in ships controlling more things. ie 10% bonus to weapons (depending on skills) to that person, etc. |
Jarod Garamonde
Action Bastards
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:17:00 -
[95] - Quote
Salm0neus wrote:When will there be something to counter act cloakies camping systems in null space?
Carebear :p |
Marianna Zydroson
Perkone
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:26:00 -
[96] - Quote
tofucake prime wrote:Marianna Zydroson wrote:In the interest of making EVE more attractive to newcomers and retaining them, and the safety and protection of the Seventy Percent of residents of HighSec, I suggest the followingGǪ
1.High Sec actually becoming GÇ£High SecurityGÇ¥ and excluding Negative Security Status individuals to LowSec or NullSec to work their way back by rebuilding there security status by the prescribed ways of CCP has made available by use of Concord and Custom Security and the individual redirected in the same manner when Jita is overcrowed. This would still allow Crimes to be still commited by HighSec Security individuals only with the appropriate Security status penaltes. Gate Passage of any negative Security status individual will not be allowed and Individuals Pods or Ships will be detained at the Gate. In the Event Negative Security Status Individuals are in Station, Then the individual will be migrated to the nearest Low Sec system Station.
2.Concord to be empowered to summarily execute criminals guilty of the capital crime of podding In HighSec Regions, by executing them by elimination of their pods by weapons fire. In addition to the current practice of destroying the offending ships. Gates and Stations will deny passage of the gates or docking in stations of current criminals and suspects of Low Security Status individuals. All Funds or Transferred funds within a suitable standardized time would be use to compensate victims of cost and replacement costs of Clones, Implants, Ships and ship modules.
3.GÇ£The ScopeGÇ¥ News Service to be expanded drastically in the Captains Quarters by reporting Local, Regional and Galactic news! Including Current Events and Trends from High, Low, and Null Sec regions (Crimes and Punishment, Murders, Smuggling, etc ), Economics (Manufacturing and Production, Price Reports, Supply and Demand, etc), Traffic Conditions and Advisories, Miscellaneous announcements from CCP and Analysis of current events. This would create an informational news source to acquaint Newcomers and citizens alike.
All of your ideas are bad and you should feel bad.
This is why Forums are difficult because of those who lack vision and imagination.
Imagine the excitement of running from Concord. Getting trapped and caught then Making the evening Scope News! You get bragging rights!
This adds to the "Realism" of the Cyber Reality we share! There should be consequences for actions!
Ganking isnGÇÖt really Suicide Ganking if you are not actually going to be GÇ£suicided by ConcordGÇ¥ now is it!? |
Mr MaltaProject
inFluX.
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:36:00 -
[97] - Quote
Dear CCP,
I was around in 2008 or whenever that fanfest happened where you showed the live demo of all of us walking around in the station environment. I remember being so amazed by everything. You had minmatar strippers, chess, and whatever that board game was that looked like a complicated monopoly.
When/why was all of this scrapped? This looked like genuine golden material to be in the game. I wanted to play poker with corp/alliance mates ever since I saw this.
Can you give any insight on when this will come back? It's getting really lonely in our condominiums. How long does it it take to scrub the air for capsuleers? |
Dr Topolex
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:38:00 -
[98] - Quote
Linda Noud wrote:I just wanted to know if Dust 514 allways will be PS3 only or if you actually are gonna make the smart move and get Microsoft on board with the idea to release it on Xbox 360 as well
This is the biggest question I have at the moment. |
Budrick3
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:41:00 -
[99] - Quote
What was the logic in removing the Hyperion's 5th Mid slot?
I understand that the proposed change is under review, and maybe tweaked, but this has to be the most non thought out change in Eve Online.
This is a blaster boat... meaning close range....
Close range requires to close distance and tackle. Those require 3 modules, MWD, Web, Scram.
Now since this is an active rep ship, that means it is going to need a heavy cap booster. So you propose that one Cap booster is going to supply energy for 8 guns, active tank with hardeners, and a mwd to close distance? |
Dave Cohen
Concord Capital Partners
The Order of Pandora
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:42:00 -
[100] - Quote
Hey devs,
Will there be any increase of PI activity (more items to produce, more kinds of basic materials to extract from planets)? Also, besides DUST 514, wil there be any way to attack planets, defend them like POS, etc.?
Many thanks and bon courage from France! :-p
Dave |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
1096
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:42:00 -
[101] - Quote
When we will get those NPC corp skins for our ships that we saw last fanfest ?  |
Dys DeVictor
Arch-Enemy
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:45:00 -
[102] - Quote
I had a few idea for stuffs that might be interesting.
How about a ship or a module (probably fit for BS or capital class) That allows for a small 'bubble' area of space to be stealthed to ship scanners and probes for a durational period. Maybe even make the ship have to stay anchored like a cyno or seige/triage. Sure it would need to cost fuel and stuff and eat cap up if ran to long. BUT it might be interesting for fleets. Potentially OP but if you could build it right it could have limited usage even if there are 2 or 3 ships fitted.
Also WH people need somethign more solid to work out of then a pos itself. I had a idea for a small 'outpost; like structure. While not invulnerable has a longer reinforce time than a pos as well as alot of hp similar in scale to a large tower but marginally higher. With capability to dock a hundred pilots or more, corp hangars with large capacity. Although limited space ultimately. As well as repair facilities. that isnt very large of a order but docking caps would be a very beneficial thing for some wh groups. Maybe even allow some sort of sov type system. But utilize a shorter/different set of rules and call it colonization. Possibly at max lv let them anchor pos guins outside the thing like sentries. I dunno just a idea.
SUPER CAPS! ok i read on a blog about the posibility of anchoring these thigns FINALLY to a pos. Then no more. Well this is a long over due idea that was great to hear. Although i dont have real life time to sit and read forums about alot of things. I think you should really consider this idea. After training for years and avoiding this due to the isk factor but more largely to the your too is stuck in 1 ship forever till u train a alt thing. This is asking alot out of someone who has spent years playing the game to not ever fly anythign else or to buy/train a whole new toon to sit in it. The anchoring to poss idea is a perfect solution. Make it cost more fuel and use soem grid. Even make pos batteries have to reinforce power grid. Or something similar. Make it take a hour to anchor so you have to scout and plan it. Give something to us on this i think there would be a handful or 10 of super cap pilots who have trained toons for other ship whod love to fly them lol. Response?
Ill also chime in on the idea mentioned ages ago about the T3 frigs and or BSs. Well? Did that idea get torpedoed or what? T3 frigs sound tasty. |
Molinator Agnon
X-Type Prospectors
26
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:45:00 -
[103] - Quote
The ship HUD currently gives a lot of highly delayed feedback. Players have had to come up with their own solutions in the case of very long cycle modules like carrier triage modules, using stopwatches rather than the interface.
Are there plans on updating the ship HUD so that modules display information more efficiently?
Additionally, would it be possible to add more keyboard shortcuts for performing tasks like reloading specific types of ammunition?
I'd really look forward to any progress on these fronts, as I think it would make the game feel much more responsive. |
Marbuel
Wormhole Exploration Crew
R.E.P.O.
40
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:48:00 -
[104] - Quote
Some questions, first for CCP Mannbjorn:
Chronicles had some great artwork produced in the past - is there any likelihood that someone can provide some potential wallpapers and eye candy of this sort?
Will the nebulas for wormholes be altered at any point?
What's going on the with EVE Store?
Will DUST players have access to their own APIs so that we can spend productive hours at work looking at the stats of our alter egos (Chribba's made a start that needs cultivating)? |
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:49:00 -
[105] - Quote
SOME GREAT QUESTIONS IN THIS THREAD!
Jarod Garamonde wrote:T3 cruisers were an amazing concept, and those of us who use them are glad they're around. We want more. When will we see new T3 ships (especially in battleship size)?
I could see T3 Battlecruisers first or Destroyers. Ideally Battleships too but I think it goes without saying that there will probably need to be ANOTHER REBALANCE after said introductions. (And not too sure how that would go with Fozzies workload. I <3 Fozzie!)
On that note, my questions:
1) IF we had T3 Battleships, could we expect to see Subsystems that would make them more effective towards Captials?
1a) Groups of smallers ships (in balance of course!)?
2) How bad is the POS and Corp roles coding (reiterated for emphasis from other posts)? If bad - time frame?
3) WIS iterations? What about Walking In Exploration sites!!?
3a) Some more social attribute skills to go along with these?
4) Certificates were just sort of dropped on us and have never been iterated on...can we ever expect some new and MORE realistic certifications?? (I.e. Why do many jump from standard to advanced from level 4 to 5? Wouldn't an improved certificate make more sense for level 4 of skill??) I just think they were sloppily done if I had to generalize and never touched after. :(
5) Custom corp or Alliance ship skins and clothing??! If we implemented a plex or ISK payment system....wouldn't it be just like hiring a CCP artist for cash to turn out a product?? Thus employing people at CCP?? I think this is a great idea that is a WIN-WIN-WIN. Win for CCP employees, Win for players, Win for ISK sinks and PLEX. (My two cents)
6) Last but not least, how did CCP Fozzie get so awesome? Is he a hybrid-alien clone sent to us to usher in galatci peace?  |
tofucake prime
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
80
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:49:00 -
[106] - Quote
Marianna Zydroson wrote:tofucake prime wrote:Marianna Zydroson wrote:In the interest of making EVE more attractive to newcomers and retaining them, and the safety and protection of the Seventy Percent of residents of HighSec, I suggest the followingGǪ
1.High Sec actually becoming GÇ£High SecurityGÇ¥ and excluding Negative Security Status individuals to LowSec or NullSec to work their way back by rebuilding there security status by the prescribed ways of CCP has made available by use of Concord and Custom Security and the individual redirected in the same manner when Jita is overcrowed. This would still allow Crimes to be still commited by HighSec Security individuals only with the appropriate Security status penaltes. Gate Passage of any negative Security status individual will not be allowed and Individuals Pods or Ships will be detained at the Gate. In the Event Negative Security Status Individuals are in Station, Then the individual will be migrated to the nearest Low Sec system Station.
2.Concord to be empowered to summarily execute criminals guilty of the capital crime of podding In HighSec Regions, by executing them by elimination of their pods by weapons fire. In addition to the current practice of destroying the offending ships. Gates and Stations will deny passage of the gates or docking in stations of current criminals and suspects of Low Security Status individuals. All Funds or Transferred funds within a suitable standardized time would be use to compensate victims of cost and replacement costs of Clones, Implants, Ships and ship modules.
3.GÇ£The ScopeGÇ¥ News Service to be expanded drastically in the Captains Quarters by reporting Local, Regional and Galactic news! Including Current Events and Trends from High, Low, and Null Sec regions (Crimes and Punishment, Murders, Smuggling, etc ), Economics (Manufacturing and Production, Price Reports, Supply and Demand, etc), Traffic Conditions and Advisories, Miscellaneous announcements from CCP and Analysis of current events. This would create an informational news source to acquaint Newcomers and citizens alike.
All of your ideas are bad and you should feel bad. This is why Forums are difficult because of those who lack vision and imagination. Imagine the excitement of running from Concord. Getting trapped and caught then Making the evening Scope News! You get bragging rights! This adds to the "Realism" of the Cyber Reality we share! There should be consequences for actions! Ganking isnGÇÖt really Suicide Ganking if you are not actually going to be GÇ£suicided by ConcordGÇ¥ now is it!?
Imagine the pain in the ass of someone who can only afford 1 account and wants to be a pirate being locked out of the core trade systems (lowsec markets blow) because of these changes. He's relatively new and doesn't have much cash. He gets an unlucky lag spike on his way back with his hauler full of supplies and gets killed by CONCORD, then the mail gets paraded around a big news service to shame him.
That's bullshit. |
Cromm Cruach
Penumbra Military Industrial Complex
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:56:00 -
[107] - Quote
I have seen many good questions in this thread, and since I didnt have time to read the entire thread, you'll forgive me if this was already asked...
WHEN WILL YOU FIX THE RIGHT CLICK INTERFACE?!?!?!?!?!
Specifically the drones. Oh, for the love of God, fix the drone interface. Even making presaved groups of drones to be treated like a turret so you can place them on your module board would be wonderful.
ex:
place drones in drone bay,
group x drones together and name the group,
drag the group name from drone list to module icons in the HUD,
set target and click drone icon in HUD interface (treat it like like it was a turret icon),
drones attack target
click again to return to orbit,
click once more to return to drone bay.
Brilliant!!
As for the rest of the right click menu, there are many options to help alleviate some of the nasty clickiness required, such as more intuitive menu options, if I click on a fleet member, I should see the option to warp to, no matter the location of their name when I click on them (ie local should also have warp to when I often see that it doesnt).
Best option for ending the right click menu of doom: HOTKEYS |
Eclavaldra
PCG Enterprises
THE ROYAL NAVY
5
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:00:00 -
[108] - Quote
Lots of ships have been improved with the various stages of rebalancing but personally I rather liked the fact that quite a few were square pegs in a round hole. I agree that it makes sense for everyone to have, eg, a combat battlecruiser, a fast battlecruiser and so on but if you remove the idiosyncracies then you also remove a lot of the flavour. The purists (and there are many) who pore over every +5cpu and -1dps may well applaud the changes but not everyone plays like that. Many are *gasp* casual players who rather liked having 2 rails and 2 missiles on their merlins.
So: given that we already have multiple versions of individual shiptypes (Iteron I-V I'm looking at YOU) my question is this:
Is there a technical reason or compelling game balance reason why the old ship versions could not be retained as a 'Mk I' version? Let the purists use the new improved versions and the dinosaurs have their fun with the old. Everyone's happy.
caveat: where stat nerfs have been deemed necessary (drake losing a launcher, etc) then fair enough those shouldn't be sidestepped. I'm talking about where there has been a substantial role change (tristam, Prophecy, original 'mining' frigs, etc).
Thanks for stepping into the line of fire you guys - should be interesting viewing!
Ecc |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
316
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:01:00 -
[109] - Quote
FYI T3 battleships or battlecruisers wont see the light of day, why?
Because T3 cruisers have the ability to form stronger fleet doctrines than current battleship fleets. so creating T3 battleships or battlecruisers would inherently make them extremely overpowered.
its more likely to see T3 destys, but they'd shake up small scale pvp quite a lot... maybe not in a good way either. thered need to be a way to stop them dominating sub t3 cruiser pvp. |
XxNeoStarxX
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:02:00 -
[110] - Quote
When Wil Fighter bombers be able to shoot at pos towers |
Daedra Blue
Atomic Biohazard
33
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:06:00 -
[111] - Quote
1. Will you implement delayed local chat? If yes, what regions?
2.When can we expect to install multiple blueprints at the same time?
3. People feel like the V3 capitals aren't that great. Will you reiterate on that or just keep them at this level for now? |
Larry GentileJr
LLS Industrial Corp
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:07:00 -
[112] - Quote
When will you guys take getting rid of bots seriously and I mean more than just lip service? I've been reporting the same 2 bots in my system for like 9 months now and they are still mining away?
Larry |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
250
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:07:00 -
[113] - Quote
What's the latest word on off grid boosts moving on grid?
Not today spaghetti. |
Shoppi Fox
money talks dirty
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:08:00 -
[114] - Quote
hello ccp, thanks for the awesome game.
Are there any plans to close the gap between black ops/Carrier and a jump freighter/rorq in terms of jumpable cargo space and price?
Something like a Orca with jump drive or something like that. i find it a pain to jump around 50-75m-¦ through null. |
Grendell
Technologies Unlimited
Superior Eve Engineering
633
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:08:00 -
[115] - Quote
Dammit why do I have a job! Oh well, I'll watch on youtube later I guess.
|
Mila Strelok
I hope you were insured
POWERED.
27
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:08:00 -
[116] - Quote
Some kind of Hisec nerf? any boost to lowsec? lowsec is dying! |
Lost True
Paradise project
2109
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:08:00 -
[117] - Quote
The question:
Do you have anything planned for Incarna/WiS/Avatar gameplay this year?
How boring is this... |
Balder Verdandi
Czerka.
WHY so Seri0Us
141
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:11:00 -
[118] - Quote
Corporation Roles.
Will there be a fix so that I can rent out lab lines to corpies or other individuals without worrying about person A cancelling the job of person B?
When will the corp roles interface have a proper fix to make it easier to use, like everything else you're changing?
Will there be a fix for the built in calculator (example, making it larger and easier to read and use)?
Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!
Player Owned Station fix dated back to 2006!
|
Bum Shadow
Es and Whizz
Hedonistic Imperative
32
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:11:00 -
[119] - Quote
Question:
Currently illegal narcotics can be sold/bought in highsec market listings. This means station owners or brokers throughout highsec should be concorded. Could you either concord the broker for his crimes. Or remove drugs from highsec market listings. Thanks.
P.S a venture resist bonus to cloud damage/a cruiser size gas mining venture would be nice too :) |
Talho Olari
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 16:11:00 -
[120] - Quote
Do you have a plan to increase skills training queue? |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |