Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
381
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 08:50:00 -
[751] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Rroff wrote:Alternatively in C5/6 space make it so the next incoming wormhole spawns on grid with the most recently escalated site (or random selection if theres more than one recently escalated) would make things a bit interesting hehe. yeah, im sure that's exactly what people want, to scan a new WH, jump through and be in the middle of 20 sleeper BSs and a half dozen hostile dreads.... ffs, use your brain. on behalf of SSC, i can honestly say we would want that...
But seriously, its a quirky mechanic to be considered in some form. Maybe add some trigger into escalations that has a chance to open a hole between escalated grid (100-200km?) and some other random hole of the same class? W-Space Realtor |
QT McWhiskers
Hard Knocks Inc.
384
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 09:21:00 -
[752] - Quote
Dunno if this has been stated yet, not reading through 23 pages of spurging. But this kind of change would completely change the game of rage rolling. For those that dont know, rage rolling means rolling the static wormhole looking for a specific class. Like say when lead farmers were invaded. Hard Knocks wormhole is a c5-c5 wormhole. So is leadfarmers. Since there are 500 and some change c5 wormholes, if we roll our static enough, statistically we will eventually reach it.
In the past, rage rolling against people who are on the ball about scanning new sigs has been a very slippery slope. When your scout warps in and reports you have the correct hole, enemy scouts are already scanning this sig. This gives us less than a minute to jump our fleet in and get off grid before being overwhelmed by enemy subs and caps. In fact if a bubble goes up before the majority of the fleet makes it in, then the effort has already been for naught.
But with these new proposed changes, you significantly increase the time we have to move our fleets in. Even if it is only 1 minute, that is enough time to warp our fleet to the hole, jump in, and get to safety even webbing a few caps off grid and into safes for the defenders to start giving us pos passwords. Now they will have to rely on combat scanning, which is much harder. Even then when they do get us at 100 percent, we are already warped to random safes so that we can get into a pos.
This significantly boosts rage rolling and pretty much makes the defense of a wormhole come down to will the rage rollers actually get the connection. Because with these changes, if they do connect, the defenders will have a massive advantage. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
632
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 11:22:00 -
[753] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Rroff wrote:Alternatively in C5/6 space make it so the next incoming wormhole spawns on grid with the most recently escalated site (or random selection if theres more than one recently escalated) would make things a bit interesting hehe. yeah, im sure that's exactly what people want, to scan a new WH, jump through and be in the middle of 20 sleeper BSs and a half dozen hostile dreads.... ffs, use your brain.
Guess the way I was meaning it didn't convey very well over the internet - wasn't exactly a serious suggestion more of a flippant if we are going to make changes lets stir it up proper. |
Jasper Goodal
W-Systems Hypercube alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 11:42:00 -
[754] - Quote
I think it's a bad idea. This patch will make scanning less effective in regions, where scanning is must-have to survive. Some time ago onboard scanners began to find sleeper anomalies. Okay. But I think timer to find K162 is fully unneccessary thing. Because of instant target locking from bombers after decloak. WH citizens will have no opportunity to protect themselves against PVPers from K162.
|
Chicken Exroofer
Regional Assault and Recon
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 11:42:00 -
[755] - Quote
Terrible idea. The amount of cross holes I get has already gone up significantly in the last year or two, which I am sure is intentional on CCP's part to increase pew. All well and good, but now it is pretty common for me to have 2 or 3 cross holes, and a nulsec or random losec AS WELL AS the static in my C3.
This happens 4 or 5 days a week. Don't you think that keeps me on my toes?
And now you want to give invaders several minutes of free time to bring in entire fleets with no warning whatsoever? Since they could form up on their side of the hole, and all click enter at once, and then have enough time to warp to a safe spot before being scanned even by an active combat probe scanner. (Scanned down, not just detected)
Pretty much everything in the last year or two has been in the favour of the ganker. Shouldn't the defender have at least a few seconds of warning, or does CCP believe blob vs. unaware outnumbered persons constitutes "PVP" ?
Invaders might as well be shooting npc's for all the risk they take already. Giving them even more of an advantage is just ridiculous. |
After Shok
Ruthenia Co
383
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 11:59:00 -
[756] - Quote
CCP Fozzie - Before you do anything with the scanning system, repair the bugs. I talked about this with CCP Leeloo, but as I understand she is not redistribution. -ƒ-Ç-¦-¦-¦-+-¦ -+-¦-+-î-+-Å -+-ü-¦-+-Ç-¦-+-é-î, -â-¦-¦-¦-¦-¦-+-ï-¦ -¦-¦-¦-+-¦-¦-é! -ó-+-é -ü-¦-+-ï-¦ -£-Ä-+-à-¦-¦-â-+-¦-+ |
Mal Nina
The Red Circle Inc.
33
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 19:46:00 -
[757] - Quote
Been watching my corps WH activity since this thread started.
In that time not once when rolling our static was the other side doing escalations or just finishing a site. There were pos's in every WH we encountered and in only a few cases was there any activity. For instance the first chain today had more than 15 WHs in it with virtually no activity and that included the C5 with one of the larger WH corps in it.( no one was really home)However, we did get a site running fleet by exploring and moving down the entire chain. We did roll into a pi+¦ata and while we looted there was one person on line who watched us.
if you want PVP you can find it, but have to search. So it seems to me this change is being pushed by lazy PVPers who want to just roll from the relative safety of their home WH until they find a fleet so that they can gank. Some of the most fun I have had and seen my corps mates have is when exploring and finding things deep in the chain and ending up in a brawl with multiple corps. I admit that most of the time the corps does NS roams, but even with these some NS WHs are left alone because those areas of NS are boring for them.
seems to me that what we need is more content so more times corps will be out of their home base.
The other argument I see being made in an offhand way is that there is too much ISK being made depressing market prices. Well, it takes about one siege cycle of the dreads in our escalation fleet to take down a fully escalated C5 site. With that sort of speed you make lots of isk and reduce the chance of other corps even finding you making isk. Out of an entire week the corps might have ships in sites for 6 hours. Now think about the chances of running into us while we are site running( 6 out of 168 possible). Now extrapolate the chance you will have against a well run operation in taking it down given mass limits on WHs. As has happened to us in the past the WH was simply rerolled while we remained on site. If we roll into a comparable fleet with home field advantage even the most ardent of our PVPers are going to ignore it, suicide is just not worth it. So for those of us that can farm our anoms we do it quickly and pretty much with total autonomy that this proposal does nothing to address. All it does is make it so we cannot respond to the opening of the WH before it is closed. ISK streams also increased due to that nice Gas harvester we all wanted. Of course some of the decrease in isk is also due to the nerf on the tengu and the lack of T3 use outside of WH space (supply and demand)
So how do we fix? Get rid of escalations!. Face it we know how to milk these for all their worth in the larger corps. Make it so sites cannot be farmed! Lower the number of sleeper anoms so that corps have to explore and set up shop outside their home system more often to get ISK and increase the respawn rate so they do not all end up in that Black hole system no one wants to be in. Add more hidden content that requires scanning. Ore sites, gas sites, ice sites, ghost sites. You may have to make them smaller so the impact of having more is decreased. The key here is to get corps moving which will help with your fights as you call them. Make both sides (carebear and PVPer) have to work for the game they want. Make blackholes a place that you might want to set up shop in so that sites get activated there Make sure T3s have value outside of WH space and in PVP so demand remains strong.
I make good money with the escalations fleet so this is not an easy proposal to make. But the current proposal being made just makes for bad gaming all the way around. No one wants to die in a firefight they had no chance against. We have a fight or flight mechanism wired into our brains for the reason, not being able to engage it will just lead to frustration which will lead to a reduced player base which is exactly what we do not want. |
Anhenka
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
490
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 20:19:00 -
[758] - Quote
Mal Nina wrote: So how do we fix? Get rid of escalations!. Face it we know how to milk these for all their worth in the larger corps.
So... remove the primary source of income that makes living several holes deep into WH space a viable choice for a large group that might spend 5-15 Bil a month in POS fuel and require hauling in a few million M3 of fuel, ships, ammo, etc on a regular basis in order to PvP and fuel towers, and leave them effectively destitute?
Oh yes, I'm sure that removing the primary income of all of the high level groups is a great way to make sure that there is a substantial population in WH's.
I'm sure that as soon as home site anoms drop to a fraction of their value, corps won't do something like lose half their players that are now unable to support their PvP habits by living in a WH.
Removing 90% of the income of a group and forcing them to run c5 marauder teams or spread alts around several holes for personal PvE in NOT a good direction for WH's.
I'm guessing you make the vast majority of your money on an alt, or unrelated to escalations entirely.
|
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
456
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 22:38:00 -
[759] - Quote
Chopping off escalations is not the answer, but a modification to it would not hurt.
Escalations should be room based. Meaning that sites could be run without bringing out a capital to "escalate it".
Room 1, normal spawn, bonus room 2, a escalation spawn, bonus room 3, tietary spawn, (none needing capitals to spawn them). Make them warp points. Its not much of a modification but essentially escalations are wormhole bonus rooms. You can remove escalations and make it room based. This doesn't fix the issue of the pew though.
You need more people outside the shields and you need to make wormhole space have a greater value than salvaging wrecks.
Aka, you need wormhole loot (ship based modules that function subpar to t2 equipment, but function much higher when overheated (you have a wormhole blaster fit, can take t2 ammo, unheated, does less damage than the normal t2 blaster, heated, does more damage than a heated t2 blaster). Similar modules can be implemented with active tanking modules.
Relic and data sites should have no sleepers, but should have a warp bubble around it (more gank chances)
You really should not be able to crit a static (or collapse it) and make your wormhole completely isolated from all space by not opening the new static (it's not hole control, its total isolation, your own pretty pve dungeon).
You half mass a static, spawn a new wormhole, Wormhole hits the reaches natural lifespan message, spawn a new wormhole. If either has been reached and a new wormhole has already spawned, do not spawn a new static.
In all cases, at some point, you'll have 2 wormholes
There should not be way for a single person to totally lock down a wormhole (and rage rolling a new one ain't the answer either)
Is this less secure. You betcha. You'll have to carebear in your dead end system just like everybody else does, with a scout on the gate and a order to starburst if a unknown neutral or alt shows up.
Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
Sarai Caldera
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 01:11:00 -
[760] - Quote
If players can enter a hole without having the hole show up, there shouldn't be a hole in that system.
I propose it goes like this, when a wormhole is formed it takes x minutes to stabilize. If you jump through before it stabilizes you get dumped in a random part of the system unable to get back until the wormhole stabilizes on your side. This would mean that people would be stuck and be scattered everywhere. |
|
Zarthie Severasse
University of Caille Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 13:41:00 -
[761] - Quote
Sounds like an awful idea that will make high class WH's even safer.
Without the ability to control home system, people will blob capitals on sites to ensure overwhelming invading forces.
Please leave the blob wars to where it belongs, to null sec. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
633
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 13:50:00 -
[762] - Quote
[quote=Phoenix Jones
You really should not be able to crit a static (or collapse it) and make your wormhole completely isolated from all space by not opening the new static (it's not hole control, its total isolation, your own pretty pve dungeon).
You half mass a static, spawn a new wormhole, Wormhole hits the reaches natural lifespan message, spawn a new wormhole. If either has been reached and a new wormhole has already spawned, do not spawn a new static.
In all cases, at some point, you'll have 2 wormholes
There should not be way for a single person to totally lock down a wormhole (and rage rolling a new one ain't the answer either)
Is this less secure. You betcha. You'll have to carebear in your dead end system just like everybody else does, with a scout on the gate and a order to starburst if a unknown neutral or alt shows up.
[/quote]
Even with control of your static you still have incoming wormholes and login traps, etc. to worry about. While my earlier idea in itself wasn't meant seriously there is potential for linking risk and reward with higher end content in all classes via some sort of change to incoming wormholes and/or some correlation between that and the actions of players within a system. Messing with statics imo isn't the answer. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 RETURN MINING INC. Illusion of Solitude
690
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 15:20:00 -
[763] - Quote
CCp , I applaud the idea of making wormhole space a little more active, there is much of merit, and some existing problems that restrict it.
Hiding incoming wormholes will do nothing to improve things, and in fact will cause harm to the overall life of it's inhabitants.
There is no such thing as risk free farming in wormholes. It can work for a while, There are those that try, but eventually BOB shows them otherwise.
Risk is an accepted part of wormhole life and even when taking all precautions things can still bite you in the ass in any class of wormhole, so please disregard this thought, it is simply an old wives tale.
However, one of the things that is often lacking is as simple as the amount of traffic, sometimes it can be like being on the end of a country track.. That can change in a hurry however with interesting effects.
So do not implement any part of the OP suggestion in any form but do all of the the following together...
1. Add an additional static to every class of wormhole. 2. Make all sites in wormholes require scanning. 3. Remove on screen sensor sweep in all classes of wormhole. 4. Identify each type of signature on first core or combat scan pass. 5. Retain scan results when jumping holes and returning while in same ship. 6. Increase spawn rate of wandering wormholes by 10% 7. Make black holes wormhole superhubs with many many wandering incoming connections,Leave their stats otherwise unchanged. 8. Single 10 second flash of dscan window when k162 is opened. 9. The value of blue loot and improved opportunities for gas and ore sites (new product with a npc purchase value) would be needed to balance the significantly increased losses incurred as a result of these changes. Note: not to provide an increase of overall rewards. The entire combination will increase traffic and prevent an excessive increase of easy kills of the alert, while giving additional opportunities to engage in combat/baiting as well as ensuring the benefit continues of an alert active play methodology. .
In summation if all these changes occurred together then this would make wormhole life more active, encourage people to travel further, encourage more destructive interaction. In combination this will be balanced to increase gains and losses in equal amounts without disrupting the market by using npc purchases to balance the overall changes. Npc price value can be adjusted to maintain equilibrium and level of interaction.
Please note in isolation almost all of these changes would be massively out of balance and destructive. Only in combination as an overall rebalance could this work. Please do not be tempted to pick and choose and only accept some. Great harm would result....... There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Megan DeMonet
The RedNeck Posse Praetorian Directorate
20
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 22:53:00 -
[764] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:
further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.
would that depend on what one considers the "best part" A Priest, a Rabbi, and an Imam walk into a bar...... |
Megan DeMonet
The RedNeck Posse Praetorian Directorate
20
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 23:17:00 -
[765] - Quote
i think we should do away with all pve entirely. who the f*** wants to mine and fight rats anyway. we all know all we all want is mass genocide. It don't matter what race is left standing, as long as all the others are gone. Put everything in the game on NPC market, set prices for it. and lets do this game rt.
I have no idea where we will get our ISk from to but the stuff on market. But Who The F*** cares. long as there is no PvE.
for all you clowns that want to pick this apart. look up the word sarcasm before you do.javascript:if%20(typeof%20posting=='undefined'||posting!=true)%20{posting=true;__doPostBack('forum$ctl00$PostReply','');} A Priest, a Rabbi, and an Imam walk into a bar...... |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13408
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 02:43:00 -
[766] - Quote
having thought about it some more, I don't think this type of delay will make a noticeable difference, in terms of gameplay or in the books.
I'm thinking of the surprisingly frequent occasions when I will scan a sig and have eyes on the k162 in time to see a scout jump in from the originating end and pop probes to scout.
There's no telling what takes them so long to jump through a hole they should know they opened... maybe it's admin stuff, like udpating siggy and creating bookmarks according to a naming convention. they might be passing through, and have no knowledge of what holes are new. but it happens a lot, and most of the time it is a resident of the originating system.
there's also the fact that bigger ships warp slow. things will reduce the benefit of a delay.
There are ways to maximize the benefit of a delay, like pinging as close as possible to an unopened static, with all the things that mean to use the hole (and not just the scout)..
that leaves a handful of situations that I can think of, in which a signature delay would make a difference, even if only under some very specific circumstances...
but I think that over time, in practice, the majority of those cases will yield no noticeable difference in their average outcome... not that you could determine such a thing.
so yeah, I've had some time to put my rabble aside and take another look at what it would really do. ...and I don't see a delay yielding your desired result, or even a result that you will see in the numbers.
I hope you do something like add depth to the game by improving signature mechanics, instead of a band-aid like a delay on one specific signature. President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
Luc'Nab
The cult of Lenin
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 08:53:00 -
[767] - Quote
bad idea. There are so many way to kill on farm. and thats one to kill without loses from atackers.
all problem form mushrooms TS? |
Jane Cumberwaffle
The cult of Lenin
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 08:58:00 -
[768] - Quote
Lol, rly? No 162? Can some one tell me, for what? I think it's not rly good idea =) Do something thats rly need ingame, or dont do anything plz |
Emika Neosignal
White Trap Empire
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 11:23:00 -
[769] - Quote
It's bad idea. Don't touch WH mechanic pzl, w-space have awesome atmosphere. All moves with K-162, local chat and etc. can destroy philosophy of wormholes. Make your experiments at lolsec's and lullsec's. |
Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
456
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 11:59:00 -
[770] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.
One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).
Good deal Fozzie. I am a bit surprised with the suggestion even being floated, though to have an open discussion, you have to talk about everything, good or bad. Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|
|
Shyzandra
EyEs.FR Dominatus Atrum Mortis
8
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 13:41:00 -
[771] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:
None of the above addresses the real issue. How to get people to fight, how to get good combat, and how to really see more wormhole pvp (both large gang and small gang).
Nobody is addressing the problems. Either because they don't know what the problems are, or they don't want to acknowledge that there is a problem in the first place.
Please, dont talk without having read the complete topic... You're embarrassing yourself... And if you did read, please, do it again... Lot of us already raised those problems and even came up with some possible solutions to make capsulers fight in W-space... |
Billy Hix
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
139
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 22:03:00 -
[772] - Quote
I just wanted to add my voice to the "Remove overlay, no delay and actively scanning with probes can see WH as they appear" side of the argument. |
Gabhrael Lyrian
Eye of the Void
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.31 23:11:00 -
[773] - Quote
The instant accessibility of this is an issue, but I LOVE the sensor overlay in known space. It's cool to kind of gaze at the spacehorizon, and then head there. Don't remove it! A few ideas: 1-Bring back ship scanners, and have all ships automatically scan upon jump-in or undock. This should keep the "exploration" incentive while keeping the time-cost of information reasonable. 2-Place the ship scanner on a 10-30 second "loop" where it scans in a slow circle, adding to the "radar sweep" effect of the sensor sweep. 3-Remove K162s from the system scanner, but not other wormholes, or delay them by some factor. I'm not a huge fan of this but it solves the problem. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13408
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 02:01:00 -
[774] - Quote
Fozzie, about the fact that you're trying to balance something here. Forget the specifics of the change, the real problem is the code responsible for wormholes. it must be pretty unwieldy if applying just one change involves enough dev time that you are able to say with certainty it will not, couldn't possibly be launched until after summer.
What will you do the next time you want to balance something in here?
Can you re-purpose cyno code to replace the existing wormhole code? they're system connections, after all. start with a cyno, and alter it one attribute at a time until you have a modular thing that looks and functions as a K162. do it again for a M273. again for a E175... and on until wormholes are individual things that you can work with.
want K162s invisible initially? too easy, they're covert cynos at heart.
tbqh i think it's a brilliant solution, you're welcome.
if I've suggested something that would work, being awesome is what I do... sometimes. if I'm wrong and wormhole code is enough of a spaghetti mess that it will always be clunky, I'm sorry and I expect you will be forced to nerf wormhole ISK in the future (since playing with the code is impractical).
about the delay... I think it's very optimistic of you to expect most players will make use of it. I think the kind of impact you're trying to make using this strategy of denying intel would require that K162 are simply not probe-able, and locating one would mean probe scanning something on grid with it.
yes, i'm serious, wormholes are supposed to be different and scary, correct?
and yeah, if someone warps away from this version of a K162 without making a bookmark, they've caused themselves a problem.
I just don't see 2, 5, 10 minutes making a difference. if you think it's a good idea to provide players with a new opening move (the choice of ship they decide to put through the hole, rather than entering warp to a virgin wormhole--often unknowningly)... why not be consistent about it and extend it to roamers?
what's beautiful about this scenario is you've balanced these ships for years; cloaky, not cloaky, big, small... they have the option to use the wormhole sneaky-like, or trade the intel benefit in scaled increments of big, heavy, in-the-face dps.
furthermore, if you're trying to drive conflict and make changes that matter, make the head of wormholes default-warpable. ie straight from overview. (I think wormholes could move closer to the concept of gates, and should/could be disassociated from signatures altogether)
it's fair; now that the tail of the hole is worth preserving, make the head easier to assault.
as it is, probing is a time sink in wormholes, and wormhole PVP. you know, the not-ISK side of the equation.
I think it's pretty significant that you're willing to preserve the ISK part. after all, throttling NPC buy orders would be the easier way to do this, so I take it you have your reasons.
One thing that is suspiciously absent from this thread is anyone thanking you for not nerfing the ISK. I'll break the ice: in exchange for not touching that part of the equation, I'm willing to see wormholes get pretty damn scary. President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13408
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 02:32:00 -
[775] - Quote
the conspiracy theorist Rain wonders if this whole thing is contrived, and you've planted it to serve as a reason for making some very unpleasant changes in the future.
...I also think it's possible that you are trolling. President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
AssassinationsdoneWrong
The Nexus 7's
146
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 05:37:00 -
[776] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: that's a popular sentiment, that things should have a counter, and it's also a very rock-paper-scissors view of things. Instead of asking "what's the counter?" and expecting that one exists, a more flexible approach would be to ask "what's the most effective response?" ...and in the case of wormholes, considering the ISK bait that is placed in them, and the absence of local intel, I think they have always been a clear, simple case of CCP asking if you would fancy a multi-billion ISK game of Marco Polo.
This is very posh verbalization however it doesn't actually say anything at all.
There is such a thing as using too many methaphors. The Nexus 7's
What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13422
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 14:52:00 -
[777] - Quote
"things aren't always perfect, and I think when it comes to wormholes, CCP expects you to get it in the ass"
kid gloves, though. for special snowflakes who think things should have counters President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
Anhenka
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
497
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 15:25:00 -
[778] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.
CCP is smarter than that. They may have made a bunch of really stupid decisions in the past but they are bright enough not to look at the most dangerous area, hardest to access, hardest logistics area of space and go "Hm, let's make it so that people lose more money than they are likely to make in this space" |
AssassinationsdoneWrong
The Nexus 7's
148
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 15:39:00 -
[779] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:"those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system,
Also.... science fiction game The Nexus 7's
What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity |
Rain6637
Team Evil
13422
|
Posted - 2014.04.01 15:39:00 -
[780] - Quote
you know what i'm saying, though. the concept is the same. whether you're a miner or working the combat sites, in those moments you are the monkey
Anhenka wrote:Rain6637 wrote: those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.
CCP is smarter than that. They may have made a bunch of really stupid decisions in the past but they are bright enough not to look at the most dangerous area, hardest to access, hardest logistics area of space and go "Hm, let's make it so that people lose more money than they are likely to make in this space"
actually, I... believe the exact opposite, but I don't think it's a matter of intelligence. President of the-áCommissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Rainfleet Mk III |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |