| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aplier Shivra
22
   |
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:01:00 -
[31] - Quote
Guttripper wrote:Re: name changes... Copied from here. "Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I "LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Experimental 100MN Afterburner I" "Phased Monopropellant I Hydrazine Boosters" are now known as "Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I "Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I" "Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive" are now known as "Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I" "Monopropellant Hydrazine Boosters" are now known as "Limited 1MN Afterburner I" "Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Experimental 1MN Afterburner I" "Y-S8 Hydrocarbon Afterburners" are now known as "Experimental 10MN Afterburner I" Can't confuse newbies you know!
dayum, those old names were epic! /cry |
Koppite
UK Corp
RAZOR Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:23:00 -
[32] - Quote
STOP making the game easier..every single patch is dumbing this game down. |
Nikolai Vodkov
Pro Synergy
56
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:24:00 -
[33] - Quote
Aplier Shivra wrote:Guttripper wrote:Re: name changes... Copied from here. "Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I "LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Experimental 100MN Afterburner I" "Phased Monopropellant I Hydrazine Boosters" are now known as "Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I "Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I" "Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive" are now known as "Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I" "Monopropellant Hydrazine Boosters" are now known as "Limited 1MN Afterburner I" "Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Experimental 1MN Afterburner I" "Y-S8 Hydrocarbon Afterburners" are now known as "Experimental 10MN Afterburner I" Can't confuse newbies you know! dayum, those old names were epic! /cry
Yes, but at least those can be justified as they make sense now whereas they didn't before. Renaming Energy > Capacitor is just plain dumb and silly.
Run level 4 missions? -áIncrease your income and help new players earn ISK. -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy
Pro Synergy is looking for dedicated Salvagers. -áWant to learn more? -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy |
Bad Messenger
Nasranite Watch
OLD MAN GANG
554
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:37:00 -
[34] - Quote
GREAT JOB CCP !
Nice changes to booster ships.
Sad thing is that when you changed skill names, you forgot to change relative hardwire implant names.
Also some certificates still requires battlecruiser skill that is no longer in game.
So lot of little fixes ahead for CCP :) |
Some Yahoo
TURnKEY iNK
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:58:00 -
[35] - Quote
Athelas Loraiel wrote:I dislike new names for noobs. it shouldnt be changed from energy emissions or transfers....it was ok.
I starting to think that they add those 'changes' just to pad their DEVLP-Log.
I'm wondering they didn't make some real concrete changes; bring the game a little bit inline with the Laws of Physics.
|
L4V4
H4LP
3
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 15:59:00 -
[36] - Quote
Nikolai Vodkov wrote:
...Renaming Energy > Capacitor is just plain dumb and silly.
This mainly effects noobs training the skills for the first time, and renaming it Capacitor differentiates it from Energy Grid.. It makes sense and is a logical change, like it or not.
But guys, please save your complaints for REAL issues--you are only reducing influence of your voice with all the fuss you make over such frivolous issues. If so many of you complain about every change/improvement to the game, then who is going to listen to you in the event that something REALLY does hurt the game?
If your going to criticize, make it constructive like Bad Messenger:
Bad Messenger wrote:
...Sad thing is that when you changed skill names, you forgot to change relative hardwire implant names...
|
Infiltrator2112
Free-Space-Ranger
Nulli Secunda
11
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:31:00 -
[37] - Quote
L4V4 wrote:[
But guys, please save your complaints for REAL issues--you are only reducing influence of your voice with all the fuss you make over such frivolous issues.
I like EVE. And I like EVE not only because of its unique gameplay mechanics which make me sit at a Titan, doing nothing for hours but somehow still manage to keep me playing
The atmosphere and the special "EVE-Feeling", that the game is something more than just another MMO are a huge part of why I like EVE as well, and to me they are nearly as important as the gameplay itself.
And if CCP starts to destroy this special feeling of "serious internet spaceships" by dumbing it down, that is a very real issue for me.
And it is hard to give constructive critisism on this topic, because there was no issue that needed to be fixed in the first place. The prior item-names were easy enough to understand and already pretty self-explaining, so why rename them? |
Mr Ignitious
Aperture Harmonics
K162
15
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:32:00 -
[38] - Quote
Could we get our custom saved probe formations to be exportable? Having to do them on every single character is a hassle. This is just a quality of life bit of feedback, but it would be nice. I also think entities like Eve Uni might appreciate being able to hand out a few more probe formations to their students.
|
Nikolai Vodkov
Pro Synergy
56
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:44:00 -
[39] - Quote
L4V4 wrote:Nikolai Vodkov wrote:
...Renaming Energy > Capacitor is just plain dumb and silly.
This mainly effects noobs training the skills for the first time, and renaming it Capacitor differentiates it from Energy Grid.. It makes sense and is a logical change, like it or not. But guys, please save your complaints for REAL issues--you are only reducing influence of your voice with all the fuss you make over such frivolous issues. If so many of you complain about every change/improvement to the game, then who is going to listen to you in the event that something REALLY does hurt the game? If your going to criticize, make it constructive like Bad Messenger:
Then they should have renamed that to Powergrid, not the other way around. These issues are VERY important. The names play a big part in the immersion. This trend in dumbing down the game is also very alarming and continuous. I think they're focusing on the wrong things to grow EVE. Now that's something all of us want.
Run level 4 missions? -áIncrease your income and help new players earn ISK. -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy
Pro Synergy is looking for dedicated Salvagers. -áWant to learn more? -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy |
Julien Brellier
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:49:00 -
[40] - Quote
Ivan Isovich wrote:Not a fan of the the new display for ship and character attributes. Forces way too much eye movement back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...Allow the option of a collapsed view (like the old way). I can see differences of opinion on this one.
All we need is for there to be a duplicated icon on the right hand side so you can easily see what's what. |
GeeShizzle MacCloud
354
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:52:00 -
[41] - Quote
I'm sorry to add my voice to the growing people annoyed at the changes to the naming of certain modules but its not a trivial thing, because every time you guys rename a bunch of stuff for what appears to be almost no reason at all, a huge chunk of people are affected when they have fits stored on forums and linked libraries via the IGB, where debates and discussions on optimising and refining fits are made. these fit now CANNOT be imported/linked/clicked on in game because the names of particular modules have been changed.
Its a real f**kin headache that u seem intent on giving us, and to be honest i find it actually very disrespectful to not even mention it in a blog or even comment about it on the end of another blog for the 1.1 changes.
Also having probably only just scratched the surface of these name changes, ill like to point out that you do not transfer capacitor, a capacitor is a piece of hardware!!! i can demonstrate it to you by using a hand held laser, and a chunk of metal & wires that is a capacitor.
A capacitor stores energy in the form of capacitance... capacitANCE! If you pay someone to make these name changes please dont pay the janitor or some other similarly qualified airhead to make changes like this. And for gods sake please dont rely on any form of scapegoat Americanisms, aluminium has 2 i's in it and any spelling that doesnt, has been written by an educational reject. Tell your people to do their homework and not wing it in 1/2 an hour before the patch is to go live.
If it was a change to separate it from certain skills that concerned different form of a ships systems, guess what, change the skill name that DOESNT have a host of modules tied to its name style.
You're better than this CCP.... dont think you are (15 minutes after you've hurriedly scraped together some changes before the deadline)
....KNOW YOU ARE (days before the deadline so u can do something about it!) |
Benito Arias
Lutinari Syndicate
Electus Matari
17
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:53:00 -
[42] - Quote
I think it would be more consistent to have T2 ships inherit their racial T1 ship bonus from their direct progenitors wherever possible. For example, Minmatar AFs got that (hurray, turret weapons all along the Rifter hull line), Stiletto got that, Muninn got that. Vagabond, no, and has less falloff than the Stabber with same waepon type and weapon upgrade modules, unless HAC V. |
Atreides 47
Atreides of Arrakis
9
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 16:55:00 -
[43] - Quote
Stop ridiculous Matar nerfs, damn it http://i.imgur.com/MejTGfL.jpg
Long Live the Fighters ! |
Sieg oder Valhalla
The Advent of Faith
19
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:05:00 -
[44] - Quote
Eve is a smart person game and we like it that way. Stop dumbing it down for no good reason. Regrouping the skills to make more sense is great; renaming a bunch of modules to ruin immersion is not. Like one of the previous posters said,
Infiltrator2112 wrote:[Sarcasm]Why not rename Mega Pulse Laser and Tachon Laser to "Big Short-Range Laser" and "Big Long-Range Laser"?[/Sarcasm] |
Master Justasii
Viable and Useless Exports LLC
9
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:11:00 -
[45] - Quote
Two ships: Vaga, Sleip, not useless, but certainly less useful now. BTW CCP, ship balancing doesn't mean make all the ships the same.
-1 to patch 1.1 |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
1203
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:31:00 -
[46] - Quote
hmskrecik wrote:[edit]
OK, I have some feedback. Are you guys sure medium railguns are where you want them to be? With faction antimatter and 4 magstabs my Proteus dishes out 800 DPS. For reference, in similar setup my Kronos does 850.
Also I love the UI work. Attributes are much clearer to see now.
That is only for a few months.
T3's are being obliterated soon.
Enjoy it while you can.
Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning.
The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Chris Winter
Zephyr Corp
V.A.S.T.
218
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:37:00 -
[47] - Quote
- Attribute display layout is bad if your show info window is more than a couple hundred pixels across. Too much eye movement.
- "Armor Honeycombing" better described what the skill did than "Armor Layering." The new name implies the exact opposite of what the skill does (layering is adding layers, honeycombing is reducing mass) and sounds like it would have something to do with the layered armor modules.
- Nighthawk's slot layout is bad compared to the Claymore. It should be 6/4 med/low, not 5/5.
|
Copter Pilot
SkREW CREW
Local Down
16
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 17:49:00 -
[48] - Quote
Abon Riff wrote:Jacumbo Ren wrote:Have noticed with scanning sites now, that if i get a site to 100% then move the probes away to scan another site, i no longer have the "warp to" button on the result. I need to pass a scan over it again, or bookmark it. Before patch the "warp to" button would stay there, even after I pulled probes.
Not sure if this is intended or not. Same as he said.. Plus even though I have previously scanned the anomaly to 100%, it appears as a large red unresolved signature or a red circle. Don't really want to scan them twice, having not jumped out of the system.
Same issue here.
|
Florian Kuehne
Tech3 Company
17
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:03:00 -
[49] - Quote
ccp, communicate with your players, you getting worse and worse.
overall some quite small good changes to the commandships but even some really bad stuff. Look cs thread.
I am very disappointed. |
Nikolai Vodkov
Pro Synergy
56
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:22:00 -
[50] - Quote
Julien Brellier wrote:Ivan Isovich wrote:Not a fan of the the new display for ship and character attributes. Forces way too much eye movement back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...Allow the option of a collapsed view (like the old way). I can see differences of opinion on this one. All we need is for there to be a duplicated icon on the right hand side so you can easily see what's what.
This please. Would fix the problem. I personally am having trouble reading attributes as well, but I'm not sure whether it's bad design or will simply take time to get used to.
Run level 4 missions? -áIncrease your income and help new players earn ISK. -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy
Pro Synergy is looking for dedicated Salvagers. -áWant to learn more? -áJoin channel: Pro Synergy |
youthink
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 18:37:00 -
[51] - Quote
I am really, really not delighted by the new module names 
I feel like I have been cheated, somehow... |
Slye
Shark Waters
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:19:00 -
[52] - Quote
Musashibou Benkei wrote:so now there's absolutely no difference between the field and fleet command ships............
armor and siege links seriously nerfed (oh, i'm sorry; "adjusted") with no real purpose. these links affect smaller groups than larger fleets.
changes made by CCP continue their downwards fall.
I hardly ever post but would like to say 2 things:
1. Too Balanced = very boring = find other game
2. So why did I waste a year training my leadership skills???? You now losing a fire power for minimum fleet bonus.
I for one do not like this. |
Spring Heeled Jim
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:24:00 -
[53] - Quote
I cannot fit my armour legion since the patch - not enough powergrid. What have you silently nerfed? |
Valkyrie D'ark
Armed Resistance Movement
20
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:42:00 -
[54] - Quote
Spring Heeled Jim wrote:I cannot fit my armour legion since the patch - not enough powergrid. What have you silently nerfed?
OMFG... They nerfed the Genolution implants. Great, half my goddamn fits are useless and wont work anymore. |
Spring Heeled Jim
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:46:00 -
[55] - Quote
Valkyrie D'ark wrote:Spring Heeled Jim wrote:I cannot fit my armour legion since the patch - not enough powergrid. What have you silently nerfed? OMFG... They nerfed the Genolution implants. Great, half my goddamn fits are useless and wont work anymore. A little heads up next time maybe? I read the patch notes like twice, and I didn't see it there few days ago. Ninjaed or I missed it thinking it was about mindlinks? Genolution CA-2 implant set bonus reduced from 50% to 40%
Ah, is that what it is?
Can I have a refund for the item please CCP? *holds breath*
|
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
117
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:48:00 -
[56] - Quote
Just something I noticed while reading this thread, the people who are negative all have very few likes. The positive comments were from people with many likes. Since more likes generally indicates better forum posts ( format, topic words ) then I would take these people's opinions as much more important that he ones without likes (especially the older ones. )
Aside from all that, I like the changes made. Things are clearer, naming conventions are better and my hanger full of haulers has a purpose again!
Naming conventions are very important, everyone complains that it dumbs down the game but for every new trial that now understands what their skills do it makes them stay longer and give us more players. Or is it that the 'l33t' PvPers that bait new players are going to run out of easy targets?
I want more people playing, I want more ships in space and I want to see everyone playing more often. |
Serenety Steel
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
75
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 19:59:00 -
[57] - Quote
Hey bro's....
VAGABOND:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire.
7.5% bonus to shield boost amount (was 5% bonus to max velocity).
FFSWTF!
|
Daenika
MMO-Mechanics.com
0
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:04:00 -
[58] - Quote
Quote:Genolution CA-2 implant set bonus reduced from 50% to 40%
Seems to be an issue with these notes. The 50% bonus provided a net boost of 3.375% to both PG and CPU (1.5% base bonus, increased by 50% (multiplicative) twice for the set bonus). Reducing it to 40% would result in only a 2.94% boost. However, data on Tranq is showing a 3.154% boost, which is consistent with a 45% set bonus, rather than a 40%.
Are the patch notes wrong and the intended set bonus is 45%, or did the change go through incorrectly. Ie. should we be expecting another reduction to the potency of these implants compared to their current live performance? |
Blacksmoke16
Moon In Scorpio
5
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:08:00 -
[59] - Quote
Ivan Isovich wrote:Not a fan of the the new display for ship and character attributes. Forces way too much eye movement back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...back and forth...Allow the option of a collapsed view (like the old way). I can see differences of opinion on this one.
+1, was easier just to look at the left side to see the attribute and what it was, vs having to look to see what it is then look right to see what its value/answer is
Option to have it the old way would be much liked |
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
312
|
Posted - 2013.09.03 20:10:00 -
[60] - Quote
Michael Loney wrote:Just something I noticed while reading this thread, the people who are negative all have very few likes. The positive comments were from people with many likes. Since more likes generally indicates better forum posts ( format, topic words ) then I would take these people's opinions as much more important that he ones without likes (especially the older ones. )
Aside from all that, I like the changes made. Things are clearer, naming conventions are better and my hanger full of haulers has a purpose again!
Naming conventions are very important, everyone complains that it dumbs down the game but for every new trial that now understands what their skills do it makes them stay longer and give us more players. Or is it that the 'l33t' PvPers that bait new players are going to run out of easy targets?
I want more people playing, I want more ships in space and I want to see everyone playing more often.
Maybe someone can write some code that filters out only the posts with enough "likes" since those are the only ones worth reading. (sarcasm)
I have to disagree. Much like how proper formatting doesn't reflect the value of a suggestion, the value of feedback can't really be measured by forum popularity. Being a forum troll, participating in the like and get likes thread, is my avatar hot threads, comment on the guy above you threads, etc. has little bearing on the value of customer feedback. Because folks are more likely to complain than compliment, feedback is, by its very nature, predominantly negative. Negative does not equal unconstructive. Rudeness is unconstructive. And maybe the "old guys" just don't write often. That doesn't mean their comments should be ignored.
YK
"He who fights and runs away lives to fight another day." |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |