|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 37 post(s) |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
100
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 16:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
Broadly speaking I approve. I particularly like the high pitched whine the goonflies are emitting.
Consider allowing the hacking skill to frig with triggering payment levels at a more convenient time to the hacker. Sitting in that hotspot long enough to complete a hack would be risk enough for the potential reward. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 17:40:00 -
[2] - Quote
I see some interesting possibilities for using these as checkpoints for sensitive transactions. Looking forward to having a play to see how far they can be perverted. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 17:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
just a normal "jet" can you say? So tractors are going to have some pull here. Why not sit at the edge of the bubble with a loot machine or a cheat noctis. That's what they wee made for, right? |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 18:03:00 -
[4] - Quote
Chinicata Shihari wrote:And CCP wonder why they are losing subscribers. They add this BS content trying to pull in new people which 90% of the current players don't want. When some of the major issues HINT: Drone Assist, POSes, don't get fixed so current subscribers quit because they are fed up with CCP not addressing the real issue.
The real issue is that goonies think they own EVE because the own the best part of New Eden. I have absolutely no doubt that your masters already have plans to dominate this system while you yap at the leash. Get to heel, there's a good boy.
|
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 18:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Batelle wrote:the fact that the ESS requires so much text to explain is the surest sign that its bad or poorly conceptualized.
Sorry, that's is in fact a sign that the CSM has batted it back to the devs more than once with exclamation marks in the margins. They are trying to break this thing before we do. If these cogs have your mind in a whirl, perhaps you should sit in a gate cap for a while. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 18:57:00 -
[6] - Quote
Proletariat Tingtango wrote:Anariasis wrote:Love how this thread turned into "helpless" Goons with their massive numbers, space and organisation crying that the actually a lot less powerful solo roamer or small gang roamer (that usually gets blobbed and camped in by said goons) will destroy everything :D This affects literally everyone in nullsec. You're seeing a lot of angry goons because surprise surprise, we tend to keep our fingers on the pulse of game development, and plenty of us understand the implications of what's happening here. We're also actually allowed to post on our mains which, with the exception of the chosen few in N3 mouthpieces, is not how our enemies operate. If you think Vince Draken or someone who matters on the other side of the Goon Curtain is going, "damn this is sweet, I want these all over my space." or if you think any renter, in any renter alliance is happy at all about this, you're full of it. It hurts goons, but it also hurts Northern Assosciates. It hurts anyone in Northern Coalition. or Nulli Secunda that spends any time ratting. It hurts every blue and non blue in nullsec for no real reason. Do you think anybody will be deploying these modules to maybe recoup some lost isk when the fact is you probably won't be able to recoup it, whether you deploy this dumb thing or not. It's an across the board nerf to everyone who makes money in nullsec that isn't importing, doing reaction chains, or is pulling out moongoo. In the south, this is known as horse-****. Not to mention that we pay taxes to our respective groups as well. If CCP wants to take isk out of the game, there are better ways to do it. If CCP wants to generate more conflicts, there are way, way better ways to do it, starting with overhauling the sov system without using gimmick deployables.
With respect, you are pinning a lot of negativity on one node that is part of a larger web we have not yet seen. I do understand your concerns, I get that the margins hurt and that you have a strong feel for how your own alliance feels about the subject. But please let the rest off null speak for itself. Maybe you can influence the math a little initially for a less profound impact, but really, why not just continue steamrollering all the POCOs as per current plan. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 19:34:00 -
[7] - Quote
MasterAsher wrote:Why not share this awesome feature with other areas of space? Why must only 0.0 get such awesome mechanics? Seems a little unfair to me that 0.0 is getting singled out.
I wondered about that too. I think I detected a touch of Azeriah in the blog's lore explanation. Expanding the influence of the deployable will take some real fast-talk. Not everybody cares about these things but I do. If I was sitting CCP side I'd be thinking maybe it's would make more sense to issue these suckers in lowsec. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 20:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:I really dislike this new ESS thing. Reasons: 1) It's too complicated for what it does. Moving around a structure, anchoring it, interacting with it, etc, all for a bit more income from rats. I view ratting as a fluent activity. 2) It feels forced, not emergent. The big obvious "take all" button vs the "share all" button. I mean, come on. I like conflict drivers just like the next player, but this is laying it on a little bit thick. 3) It barely even makes sense. Look at the story in the blog and how convoluted it seems. It's so ridiculously arbitrary. Just reading it makes me cringe: Quote:An ESS allows an empire to monitor bounty-generating activities in the solar system it is deployed in. Why this is a thing is due to an on-going and ever-growing feud between the empires and Concord. It's like, what? Sure, it makes sense...I guess..., but I really wouldn't call this EVE quality. Siphons are a lot more direct, usable, understandable, and I think actually great for the game. This ESS thing though, it's bad... Scrap it, back to the drawing board please.
1) It's complex because it's has got handles for jigsaw pieces we've not seen yet. 2) It does feel forced, I agree. It could be integrated with hacking skills as mentioned elsewhere. Pressing buttons for rewards has the taste of a rat trap (heh, see what I did there?) 3) I assume the lore puzzles me slightly because I've been out to the game for a while. But if I'm not alone in looking at that snippet slantwise then there is a problem.
It does NOT need scrapping, it needs placing in context. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 21:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Snowflake Tem wrote:1) It's complex because it's has got handles for jigsaw pieces we've not seen yet. It doesn't matter the reason that it is overly complex, I'm just pointing out that it is bad for these types of things to become complex. Contrast it to an MTU or a Mobile Depot or even a siphon. This ESS thing is just *facepalm*. Snowflake Tem wrote:It does NOT need scrapping, it needs placing in context. It does need scrapping. This concept of a "booster" anchorable is horrific slippery slope, as you could invent endless different varieties of them, giving players the incentive to run around and anchor random crap if they want their "full reward." Hauling around a black box, placing it where you rat, anchoring it, interacting with it, all so that it can give you a bit extra income...but store it in the middle of the system for some bizarre reason. Just awful. Anchorables should be generic sandbox tools (theft/storage/utility), not passive boosters with some artificial risk mechanic built-in.
Do we agree that infrastructure hubs do not deliver all that was hoped for? Could this not be an alternate structure on a similar theme that interfaces with real players, and not weekend administrators? Isn't understanding the complexity of any system in EVE part of it's allure?
I think you are mistaking the slippery slope for more star systems slipping through the fingers of a certain alliances' grip.
Having said that, from a entirely abstract perspective. I don't understand the gathered data being kept on record for everybody benefit if the blighter is destroyed. If the thing is a telecommunications tower to Empire data centres I want to see new structures going up in empire to receive the data if they don't already exist. The ownership of the data is obscure. Were the isk is coming is not entirely clear. The margins seem arbitrary. The triggers for ramping up of rewards is downright baffling, I assume deliberately so. I like that CCP will be able to track what happens to the isk chits, but don't feel that the dev teams hard work has been successfully set in the game world context.
Don't abort this baby yet, I want to see what it grows into. |
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
101
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 22:37:00 -
[10] - Quote
Re-read all the posts and get the negative vibe. Disruptive, noisy and in your face blatant sponging. No benefit to destroying the irritant. No way to curtail it's deployment. No way to restrict is production unless it is seeded very cleverly.
Needs a tap or two with nerf bat.
|
|
|
|
|