Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 53 post(s) |
Utremi Fasolasi
The Jagged Edge Rebel Alliance of New Eden
244
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:23:00 -
[181] - Quote
Heinel Coventina wrote:
What is CCP's plan to introduce new players into exploration, a gameplay mechanic that has no parallels from other MMOs, hence unfamiliar, and,
What is CCP doing to mitigate disappointments during this transitional period between phasing out the old passive system and a highly integrated play style?
There is a new Exploration career tutorial, I gave my feedback about it here. |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
502
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:25:00 -
[182] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Got an easy one ( kinda off topic though), did the mirror every happen? No so no bug reports from me |
Salpun
Paramount Commerce
502
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:27:00 -
[183] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Heinel Coventina wrote:
What is CCP's plan to introduce new players into exploration, a gameplay mechanic that has no parallels from other MMOs, hence unfamiliar, and,
What is CCP doing to mitigate disappointments during this transitional period between phasing out the old passive system and a highly integrated play style?
There is a new Exploration career tutorial, I gave my feedback about it here. Thanks for looking at that I was planning to do that as soon as I could log in. Did you bug report all those issues?
|
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services The Possum Lodge
316
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:29:00 -
[184] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:For the people saying the 'loot pinata sucks' and the like could you vocalise the problems you have with it?
So far I've collated: -feel good list
You missed the:
-Uberstacked objects causing MASSIVE graphics overheating issues among other things (frame rate drops ect)
http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing -á-á < Unified Inventory is NOT ready... |
Kel hound
Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:33:00 -
[185] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:For the people saying the 'loot pinata sucks' and the like could you vocalise the problems you have with it?
So far I've collated: - It's not the way EVE has previously worked. - Collision is a pain, both with the size of the Data Sites and the positioning of some containers. - Picking can be difficult if you're not using a mouse. - Picking can be difficult if you're blinded by the site contents. - Loot haul seems low in comparison with how it was before. - Losing cans feels bad, particular after the effort of having to hack the container. This makes it feel like a penalty. - Not knowing what is any particular can so it feels bad not being able to make good choices. - The 'bad loot' is far too bulky so it is excessively penalising as you have to stop and sort it out.
FEw extra things I'd like to add to that list, especially if you're set on keeping this stupid loot ejection system.
- Loot ejection is random. I've had cases where after a successful hack the loot has spewed into the structure I was hacking, causing most of the loot to be lost as my ship bounces helplessly off the structure. The general cluttered nature of anoms doesn't help much either. See quote below for an example.
mynnna wrote:http://i.imgur.com/FhZOW4A.png Picture to illustrate what I mean.
-When attempting to tractor in the mini-cans its very difficult to know when your ship is ready to tractor in a new can and if your too eager (because why wouldn't you be, your hard earned loot is about to despawn) to click a new can the system seems to "lock up" for want of a better phrase and won't do anything for a few precious seconds.
CCP Prime wrote: 1) No. By design a one player is never meant to be able to catch all cans. Hence the constant take time and the expiring of stuff. 2) They still will not show on the overview. We want players to actually use our space view. It is a challenge in 3D based decision making and for CCP it is a challenge to improve whatever needs improving when you have to deal with things directly in space.
1) Thats fine, look if you want to give us a limited time to access these cans, so be it. But the loot ejection system is punishment. It is a punishment mechanic. A better way would be on a successful hack to instead give the same system only in a loot window. None of this "chase it down!" bullshit. A simple, standard loot window where we can only pull one "mini-can" at a time and have a limited amount of time to do it before it locks permanently; but with the reward of not having to madly rotate the camera (while trying to avoid the visual clutter that lags frame rate) madly trying to pick out cans.
2) That would be fine - if the space view was intuitive to navigate. It's not. There is a reason we still have an 8 year old overview - its the best system for navigating EVE you've yet given us. Suddenly expecting us to be master of clicking on things in 3D space when for years you've taught us to use the overview is pants on head STUPID. |
|
CCP Prime
C C P C C P Alliance
38
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:40:00 -
[186] - Quote
Panhead4411 wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote:For the people saying the 'loot pinata sucks' and the like could you vocalise the problems you have with it?
So far I've collated: -feel good list You missed the: -Uberstacked objects causing MASSIVE graphics overheating issues among other things (frame rate drops ect)
Yeah, that was an unfortunate consequence of having to redo 200+ dungeons and not being able to finish all that massive work before it hit SiSi. Of course that will not be apparent on SiSi. Programmer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Nicola Arman
Saiph Industries Upholders
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:42:00 -
[187] - Quote
I'm so glad you changed the "can spew" speed. Feels much better and is more sensible to manage now. |
Heinel Coventina
University of Caille Gallente Federation
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:44:00 -
[188] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Heinel Coventina wrote:
What is CCP's plan to introduce new players into exploration, a gameplay mechanic that has no parallels from other MMOs, hence unfamiliar, and,
What is CCP doing to mitigate disappointments during this transitional period between phasing out the old passive system and a highly integrated play style?
There is a new Exploration career tutorial, I gave my feedback about it here.
Hmm. I personally do not believe in the tutorials at all. Not only were they unhelpful in introducing new players to what makes EVE the game that it is, or what one could expect, but they were also set up like those text-laden quests from other MMOs. It pushes people to the missioning play style, which makes actual exploration completely counter intuitive.
|
Nicola Arman
Saiph Industries Upholders
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:47:00 -
[189] - Quote
Heinel Coventina wrote:Utremi Fasolasi wrote:Heinel Coventina wrote:
What is CCP's plan to introduce new players into exploration, a gameplay mechanic that has no parallels from other MMOs, hence unfamiliar, and,
What is CCP doing to mitigate disappointments during this transitional period between phasing out the old passive system and a highly integrated play style?
There is a new Exploration career tutorial, I gave my feedback about it here. Hmm. I personally do not believe in the tutorials at all. Not only were they unhelpful in introducing new players to what makes EVE the game that it is, or what one could expect, but they were also set up like those text-laden quests from other MMOs. It pushes people to the missioning play style, which makes actual exploration completely counter intuitive. I highly doubt that true newbies to the game would go seek out sites by themselves after they complete the tutorials. The more likely scenario would be that most of them will go find more agents instead.
Agreed. Tutorials send the wrong message.. |
Azurielle Silestris
Midnight Elites United Federation of Commerce
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 16:49:00 -
[190] - Quote
CCP Prime wrote:Sheena Tzash wrote:CCP Prime wrote:So for the scattering mechanism we've reduced the speed that the cans eject out at. It'll make chasing them almost unneeded. Crimewatch will now apply to the cans like as with any other loot. The mini container names will actually hint at what you can get from them (currently on SiSi it is a completely random association.) This will help deciding on what loot you are actually going for.
Also, a few bugs, like the one when the bracket disappears for a container that had started to blink, has been fixed.
We want to iterate on tying hacking success to the scattering, and hopefully we'll be able to do so in a point release. 1) If the speed is much slower now is it actually possible to get 100% of the ejected loot? 2) If the cans are now named will they show on the overview or will you have to spend time mousing over each can to find out whats in it before you click it? 1) No. By design a one player is never meant to be able to catch all cans. Hence the constant take time and the expiring of stuff. 2) They still will not show on the overview. We want players to actually use our space view. It is a challenge in 3D based decision making and for CCP it is a challenge to improve whatever needs improving when you have to deal with things directly in space.
Scuzzy's in full-blown rage mode right now so I'll take over:
#1 Is fine, even if I don't get all the loot if I can at least get the most valuable item (blueprint) 100% of the time if I'm alert and I'm fine with that.
#2 Would it be a problem to have the brackets color-coded or the cans differently shaped to identify whats in them now that can names are specific? I don't mind chasing cans as long as I can go *Arr! There be me gold nuggit'* and make a beeline for it even if I miss 60-90% of the other cans. Right now I keep zooming my mouse over all of them to spot the BPC's can and had a few close encounters of almost missing them since I accidentally went for a decoder instead. Overall I feel it could be fixed in a point release, but the new ''fixed'' system with the slower-yet-faster-despawning cans feels pretty good and might warrant bringing the new corp noobs along for some free iskies since the cans they'd loot would go to waste anyways.
My suggestions: Color-coded brackets for pinata spew types, bigger brackets.
Otherwise, the new iteration doesn't feel nearly as frustrating. I'll have to strap down scuzzy so he'll actually go back to hacking the cans again on SiSi before the expansion, though. |
|
Nicola Arman
Saiph Industries Upholders
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:04:00 -
[191] - Quote
wrote:When attempting to tractor in the mini-cans its very difficult to know when your ship is ready to tractor in a new can and if your too eager (because why wouldn't you be, your hard earned loot is about to despawn) to click a new can the system seems to "lock up" for want of a better phrase and won't do anything for a few precious seconds.
The cans turn green when they are clickable and in range. They turn yellow when the item is "busy". No color when out of range. Correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
CCP Prime
C C P C C P Alliance
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:12:00 -
[192] - Quote
Nicola Arman wrote: wrote:When attempting to tractor in the mini-cans its very difficult to know when your ship is ready to tractor in a new can and if your too eager (because why wouldn't you be, your hard earned loot is about to despawn) to click a new can the system seems to "lock up" for want of a better phrase and won't do anything for a few precious seconds. The cans turn green when they are clickable and in range. They turn yellow when the item is "busy". No color when out of range. When your hack is successful and the cans spew, take a moment to hover over them and decide which ones you want first over others (eg. avoiding scrap). They move much slower now and there is also an audio queue after you loot a can. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Green = In range and you can take one Yellow = In range but you are currently busy taking a can so you'll have to wait until they turn green White = If the bracket is BIG and your tractor beam effect is connected, it is the can you are currently taking. Otherwise, it is a can that is out of range and you can gauge the distance by the opacity of the bracket.
The small cans are already differently shaped, but I'll admit, they are small! It's an ongoing challenge to decide how far we can go with brackets while staying within the UI design rules for brackets. (And if we have to expand upon those). Programmer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Yinmatook
Skilled Refugees Carthaginian Naval Supply Industries
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:12:00 -
[193] - Quote
Is it intentional that resizing the scan range by clicking the blue sphere and dragging it also rearranges the probes in space (to maintain coverage). However, selecting all the probes in the list and resizing the scan range via the right-click menu does not rearrange the probes in space? |
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:18:00 -
[194] - Quote
In related news we've made the following changes:
Introduced the Polymorphic Shield Utility Subsystem to difficulty tier 3. Removed the Secondary Vector Utility Subsystem from difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Coherence of the Anti-Virus Suppressors in difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. Fixed an issue where some containers in exploration dungeons where still overlapping.
We are still in the process of balancing the hacking and scattering mechanics but please keep your eyes on Singularity as it get's updated and keep the feedback coming.
Cheers! CCP RedDawn
Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1075
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:24:00 -
[195] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:In related news we've made the following changes:
Introduced the Polymorphic Shield Utility Subsystem to difficulty tier 3. Removed the Secondary Vector Utility Subsystem from difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Coherence of the Anti-Virus Suppressors in difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. Fixed an issue where some containers in exploration dungeons where still overlapping.
We are still in the process of balancing the hacking and scattering mechanics but please keep your eyes on Singularity as it get's updated and keep the feedback coming.
Cheers! CCP RedDawn
What about T3 ships will they get a bonus to the coherence at all? Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Nicola Arman
Saiph Industries Upholders
24
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:24:00 -
[196] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:In related news we've made the following changes:
Introduced the Polymorphic Shield Utility Subsystem to difficulty tier 3. Removed the Secondary Vector Utility Subsystem from difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Coherence of the Anti-Virus Suppressors in difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. Fixed an issue where some containers in exploration dungeons where still overlapping.
We are still in the process of balancing the hacking and scattering mechanics but please keep your eyes on Singularity as it get's updated and keep the feedback coming.
Cheers! CCP RedDawn
You mean I don't have to leave my wonderful Cheetah ever again???
I LOVE YOU SO MUCH! |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
178
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:25:00 -
[197] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:In related news we've made the following changes:
Introduced the Polymorphic Shield Utility Subsystem to difficulty tier 3. Removed the Secondary Vector Utility Subsystem from difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Coherence of the Anti-Virus Suppressors in difficulty tier 3. Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. Fixed an issue where some containers in exploration dungeons where still overlapping.
We are still in the process of balancing the hacking and scattering mechanics but please keep your eyes on Singularity as it get's updated and keep the feedback coming.
Cheers! CCP RedDawn
Just need to ask, since I've seen it asked dozens of times and have yet to see it answered (if it has been I'm sorry), but what the bloody ell are you guys referring to when you say "tier"? I assume it's the hierarchy of difficulty to the games but what are they, how many? Everyone seems to be assuming it's a reference to Hi-sec, Low-sec, and 0.0 but as I far as I know this is just an assumption. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
60
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:38:00 -
[198] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. That's excellent, I still think a certain cruiser class linked closely to exploration should get some strength bonus too, but the above is already a good start towards a working ship progression and risk/reward balancing.
Manssell wrote:Just need to ask, since I've seen it asked dozens of times and have yet to see it answered (if it has been I'm sorry), but what the bloody ell are you guys referring to when you say "tier"? I assume it's the hierarchy of difficulty to the games but what are they, how many? Everyone seems to be assuming it's a reference to Hi-sec, Low-sec, and 0.0 but as I far as I know this is just an assumption. This describes the difficulty of the cans and their minigame. It is not linked exclusively to system sec as for example in some lowsec sites you could have cans from tier 1, 2 and 3. At least where I have tested tier 1 cans are called debris, tier 2 rubble and tier 3 remains. The higher the tier the bigger the minigame grid and the more coherence the defences have and at tier 3 you get those nasty Suppressors too. I'm not sure if there are more than 3 tiers, I haven't tested in nullsec yet. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1075
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:45:00 -
[199] - Quote
Rob Crowley wrote:CCP RedDawn wrote:Lowered the Virus Strength stat bonus on all the Tech I exploration frigates from +10 to + 5. Given all the the Tech II exploration frigates a +10 Virus Strength stat bonus. That's excellent, I still think a certain cruiser class linked closely to exploration should get some strength bonus too, but the above is already a good start towards a working ship progression and risk/reward balancing. I don't think +6/level on the Emergent Locus Analyzer would be too much and then maybe move the tractor beam bonus to a static bonus on the sub system. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:53:00 -
[200] - Quote
In response to the above questions since my post.
When "tier" is used it means the difficulty level of the loot containers and it ranges from 1 to 4. (Easy to Hard) Also, we're going to be looking at the Tech III bonuses soon. (but not soonGäó) I'll post more when things change.
Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
|
Nar Tha
Neural-Boost.com
124
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 17:56:00 -
[201] - Quote
I think the coherence bonuses from rigs are not working. |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
74
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:04:00 -
[202] - Quote
Any chance for virus strenght bonus to Force Recon Ships? That would create a nice progression from T1 Frigate>T2Frigate>T2 Cruiser>T3 Cruiser as Force Recon is somewhere in the middle of price range and in terms of versatility. Slot layout is nice for exploration + ability to fit cov ops.
Pilgrim used to be a popular ship for profession sites with the old sites.. Falcon looks like a good replacement after the removal of the rats. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Aegis Solaris
1913
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:05:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP Prime wrote:Nicola Arman wrote: wrote:When attempting to tractor in the mini-cans its very difficult to know when your ship is ready to tractor in a new can and if your too eager (because why wouldn't you be, your hard earned loot is about to despawn) to click a new can the system seems to "lock up" for want of a better phrase and won't do anything for a few precious seconds. The cans turn green when they are clickable and in range. They turn yellow when the item is "busy". No color when out of range. When your hack is successful and the cans spew, take a moment to hover over them and decide which ones you want first over others (eg. avoiding scrap). They move much slower now and there is also an audio queue after you loot a can. Correct me if I'm wrong. Green = In range and you can take one Yellow = In range but you are currently busy taking a can so you'll have to wait until they turn green White = If the bracket is BIG and your tractor beam effect is connected, it is the can you are currently taking. Otherwise, it is a can that is out of range and you can gauge the distance by the opacity of the bracket. The small cans are already differently shaped, but I'll admit, they are small! It's an ongoing challenge to decide how far we can go with brackets while staying within the UI design rules for brackets. (And if we have to expand upon those). And they are red when someone else is tractoring it in. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
333
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:07:00 -
[204] - Quote
Nar Tha wrote:I think the coherence bonuses from rigs are not working.
This might be because you are encountering a known issue where the descriptions are misleading. So the following happens below:
The Memetic Algorithm Bank rig has a description: "This ship modification is designed to increase the efficiency of a ship's hacking modules."
This is correct as it only affects the hacking (Data) Analyzers, not the Relic Analyzers but it should display: "This ship modification is designed to increase the efficiency of a ship's Data modules."
The Emission Scope Sharpener has the description: "This ship modification is designed to increase the efficiency of a ship's analyzer modules."
This is incorrect as it only affects the Relic Analyzers and should be: "This ship modification is designed to increase the efficiency of a ship's Relic modules."
This should be fixed before release. Hope this helps. Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Nar Tha
Neural-Boost.com
124
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:22:00 -
[205] - Quote
Nevermind I'm stupid. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1520
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 18:33:00 -
[206] - Quote
Should we be bug reporting the sites that still spawn rats on failed hacks, or are you guys just working down a list to remove them?
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|
Sorcha Lothain
Vogon Galactic Construction
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:00:00 -
[207] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Sorcha Lothain wrote:I think the idea of making "loot pinata" a punishment for a failed hacking/archaeology attempt is an excellent idea. Having something blow up in your face is usually a bad thing. It seems really, really, odd as a reward. If you successfully hack the site you get everything in the can. If you fail you get "loot pinata" AND everything else that comes with a failed attempt (e.g. rats, explosive traps).
I guess from a pvp or loot ninja's perspective having the can explode with every success is a good thing. Why should you have your cake and eat it too? Loot pi+Ĥata as a failure mechinac defeats the purpose of the mini game and any player skill/luck in exploration and will only glorify blobing in even more areas of the game.
It doesn't defeat the purpose of the mini game at all. If anything it would encourage you being successful at the mini game. If you've maxxed your skills and fitted your ship expressly for completing the mini game then why should my reward be the chance I don't get all my loot.
It isn't that I want to "have my cake and eat it too", I just don't want it to blow up in my face.
I wanted exploration to be my solo profession because it was much more satisfying than mining. Though sadly it's starting to seem more appealing. As a miner if you dedicate your skills to your trade and fit your ship you get 100% of your loot in your hold every single time. There's something to do in every single system and you don't really need to bring a friend or a second ship. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1076
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:05:00 -
[208] - Quote
Sorcha Lothain wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Sorcha Lothain wrote:I think the idea of making "loot pinata" a punishment for a failed hacking/archaeology attempt is an excellent idea. Having something blow up in your face is usually a bad thing. It seems really, really, odd as a reward. If you successfully hack the site you get everything in the can. If you fail you get "loot pinata" AND everything else that comes with a failed attempt (e.g. rats, explosive traps).
I guess from a pvp or loot ninja's perspective having the can explode with every success is a good thing. Why should you have your cake and eat it too? Loot pi+Ĥata as a failure mechinac defeats the purpose of the mini game and any player skill/luck in exploration and will only glorify blobing in even more areas of the game. It doesn't defeat the purpose of the mini game at all. If anything it would encourage you being successful at the mini game. If you've maxxed your skills and fitted your ship expressly for completing the mini game then why should my reward be the chance I don't get all my loot. It isn't that I want to "have my cake and eat it too", I just don't want it to blow up in my face. I wanted exploration to be my solo profession because it was much more satisfying than mining. Though sadly it's starting to seem more appealing. As a miner if you dedicate your skills to your trade and fit your ship you get 100% of your loot in your hold every single time. There's something to do in every single system and you don't really need to bring a friend or a second ship. Right now if you are successful you get loot, if you are not I will be destroyed with no loot at all. With what you are proposing if you are successful you get loot, if you fail you still get loot. How is that not having your cake and eating it too? Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
|
CCP RedDawn
C C P C C P Alliance
334
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:12:00 -
[209] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote:Should we be bug reporting the sites that still spawn rats on failed hacks, or are you guys just working down a list to remove them?
No need for bug reports for this right now. We are in the process of fixing all of these containers and it should be finished soon, but please hold off on the reports about the rats.
Thanks! Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Sven Viko VIkolander
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
72
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 19:41:00 -
[210] - Quote
CCP Prime wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:Maybe we need "sticky mice". That is the pointer starts following things I set it on. Sort of like sticky aiming in Dust. Indeed, we've already (not out on SiSi though) changed it so that the command to take happens when the mouse button goes down as opposed to up. If we get to iterate, ideas like a magnetic mouse, bracket selection prediction etc are on the table because they would improve the eve experience not only for this feature, but for the game in general.
Forget about "if we get to iterate," the hacking game and loot scatter should not go on live until you figure out: 1. That on one likes the loot spew, and 2. That the mini-game, to be enjoyable, needs to involve much more strategy and much less random clicks.
You are basically putting something that is only a neat prototype straight on to live, and after 10 years I'd except CCP to know not to do that. After the first wave of trial I think you are going to get far less people doing these sites than even do them now. The only reason I am going to scan them down is so I can cloak in them and wait for people to kill.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |