Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 81 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
Anize Oramara
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
222
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 23:02:00 -
[841] - Quote
I see irony is lost on certain parts of nullsec, what a surprise
Also reading comprehension but at this point thats a given |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1554
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 00:42:00 -
[842] - Quote
I like the idea of mass changing your double-tap timer. Do this one instead. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Kel hound
Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking
107
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 02:23:00 -
[843] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far. Special thanks to those who are providing lots of text about the reasoning behind your feelings, as those are the most useful posts.
We're continuing to pour over all the feedback and considering multiple options for adjustments to the plan based on what we're hearing. We probably won't have something new to announce for a couple days but we want you to know that we are listening and working hard behind the scenes in the meantime.
This is starting to feel like the hacking loot-scatter mechanic all over again. Is CCP going full steam ahead with this, despite 90% of w-space trying to tell them why it is a bad idea?
At this point this thread consists of basically 2 things: Schadenfreude, and wormholers against this change. |
Aedh Phelan
Krannon of Sherwood Carthage Empires
41
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 02:26:00 -
[844] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: "Normally I wouldnGÇÖt feel that we have to go over our views this explicitly, but IGÇÖve been seeing a distressing number of players misunderstand our position and I wanted to hopefully end the confusion once and for all." http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/into-the-known-unknowns/?_ga=1.1548721.1488620783.1407808787
The dev blog notice on the launcher dated 8/11 indicates no changes so far to the spawn distance changes.
So 41 pages of feedback mostly outlining the many various ways this change is terrible. And yet it seems we actually do "explicitly" understand your (CCP Fozzie) position. Your position seems to "explicitly" be that you want to do it and 41 pages of mostly "explicitly" thought out reasons of objection are over-reactions by silly little noobs and must have gone unread or dismissed as worthless drivel.
In this case Fozzie, IMHO, your words are like the friendly insincere smile from someone quietly stealing our candy. You assume it is for our own good because clearly you think we don't have a clue. |
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
23
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 02:38:00 -
[845] - Quote
FleetAdmiralHarper wrote:
my corp unsubdued. all 15 of my friends who were gonna join the new corp we made to go into a wh again, unsubed, all 10 aussies who were part of the night crew unsubdued and wont come back. i have personally have 2 weeks left on my membership. i CANT WAIT for it to end. and finally be free of this crappy 2nd job that needs to be paid for.
we will not be coming back, and this is my last post on the eve community forums. im gonna go play a fun 2.5d facebook game with 5x the active player base that eve ever had. (kinda sad aint it) ccp has got to be the worse and most ******** company to ever have blundered its way into making a game. but WE are even bigger idiots for paying them as long as we did.
rip in pepperoni we will miss u 4ever Goodnight sweet prince May sweet dreams com 2 u |
calaretu
Honestly We didnt know Unsettled.
136
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 05:46:00 -
[846] - Quote
As part of one of the smaller groups in wormholespace who now are supposed to die in a fire and depression (according to everyone in this thread) I am a bit amazed about the arguments thrown out here.
I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. And the concept that you can isolate your system and farm in peace solo cap escalations in c5 and c6 space is to my mind at the border to gamebreaking.
I was at first divided on this subject. But right now I lean to heavily support this change. Not because its a good change. But because the status quo is worse.
And I really do hope that this change how everyone live in wormholespace. Because its needed.
You big corps and alliances. Ask yourself this. How many people in your corp/alliance are playing jabber online? Who only turn up for the pinged fights? Is that really good gameplay in your eyes?
For the smaller groups who enjoy pvp. C4 space are seeing a new purpose. Sure c5 has better isk, but you dont need to live there to harvest it. Open your eyes to the options these changes bring. The new dual statics literally come in all flavours. Are risk free farming really the winning point of why you live in wormholespace? Why you play this game?
So yes. I now support this change ~Bringer of happiness
http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/ |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3639
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 06:04:00 -
[847] - Quote
calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Andiedeath
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
271
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 07:17:00 -
[848] - Quote
calaretu wrote:As part of one of the smaller groups in wormholespace who now are supposed to die in a fire and depression (according to everyone in this thread) I am a bit amazed about the arguments thrown out here.
I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. And the concept that you can isolate your system and farm in peace solo cap escalations in c5 and c6 space is to my mind at the border to gamebreaking.
I was at first divided on this subject. But right now I lean to heavily support this change. Not because its a good change. But because the status quo is worse.
And I really do hope that this change how everyone live in wormholespace. Because its needed.
You big corps and alliances. Ask yourself this. How many people in your corp/alliance are playing jabber online? Who only turn up for the pinged fights? Is that really good gameplay in your eyes?
For the smaller groups who enjoy pvp. C4 space are seeing a new purpose. Sure c5 has better isk, but you dont need to live there to harvest it. Open your eyes to the options these changes bring. The new dual statics literally come in all flavours. Are risk free farming really the winning point of why you live in wormholespace? Why you play this game?
So yes. I now support this change
Finally another wormholer with some balls. Can't believe the people unsubbing after pleading for changes and them getting butt hurt when they may actually change current dynamics. This is still by far the best online MMO. Well to Fozzie to sticking to his guns. So far... Director Swift Angels Alliance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3247397#post3247397 INGAME CHANNEL: Sefem Public |
calaretu
Honestly We didnt know Unsettled.
137
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 07:19:00 -
[849] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options.
But I could do it risk free. Their fleets wasnt on 0 on wormhole. Thats whats wrong imo. The risk free part. And its only in 5/6-5/6 you have the option of instaclosing. Shoukd small groups be able to live in these systems? I suggest perhaps not. A lot of other systems to live in. And we are making this move ourself as our active numbers had a drop. So yes I dont support the argument that small groups should be able to live in 5/6-5/6 ~Bringer of happiness
http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/ |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 08:23:00 -
[850] - Quote
Kel hound wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far. Special thanks to those who are providing lots of text about the reasoning behind your feelings, as those are the most useful posts.
We're continuing to pour over all the feedback and considering multiple options for adjustments to the plan based on what we're hearing. We probably won't have something new to announce for a couple days but we want you to know that we are listening and working hard behind the scenes in the meantime. This is starting to feel like the hacking loot-scatter mechanic all over again. Is CCP going full steam ahead with this, despite 90% of w-space trying to tell them why it is a bad idea? At this point this thread consists of basically 2 things: Schadenfreude, and wormholers against this change.
It would seem the remaining 10 % of supposed WH dwellers, alongside the nullsec bears who know all about WHs, are enough for him to push the change.
Id say that no matter how many pages we write, theyll go ahead because they think its good. Few hundreds subs mean nothing to them so why not screw up the game for us.
|
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 08:26:00 -
[851] - Quote
calaretu wrote:Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options. But I could do it risk free. Their fleets wasnt on 0 on wormhole. Thats whats wrong imo. The risk free part. And its only in 5/6-5/6 you have the option of instaclosing. Shoukd small groups be able to live in these systems? I suggest perhaps not. A lot of other systems to live in. And we are making this move ourself as our active numbers had a drop. So yes I dont support the argument that small groups should be able to live in 5/6-5/6
ive closed a WH with enemy T3 fleet trying to catch me. Thats not the point. With the new mechanics, there is no way to close when there is enemy unless you have big support fleet ready to pull you out if needed. Small groups will hav to log off and wait.
If you tell me how does that create content please?... |
Anize Oramara
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
223
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 08:26:00 -
[852] - Quote
calaretu wrote:As part of one of the smaller groups in wormholespace who now are supposed to die in a fire and depression (according to everyone in this thread) I am a bit amazed about the arguments thrown out here.
I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. And the concept that you can isolate your system and farm in peace solo cap escalations in c5 and c6 space is to my mind at the border to gamebreaking.
I was at first divided on this subject. But right now I lean to heavily support this change. Not because its a good change. But because the status quo is worse.
And I really do hope that this change how everyone live in wormholespace. Because its needed.
You big corps and alliances. Ask yourself this. How many people in your corp/alliance are playing jabber online? Who only turn up for the pinged fights? Is that really good gameplay in your eyes?
For the smaller groups who enjoy pvp. C4 space are seeing a new purpose. Sure c5 has better isk, but you dont need to live there to harvest it. Open your eyes to the options these changes bring. The new dual statics literally come in all flavours. Are risk free farming really the winning point of why you live in wormholespace? Why you play this game?
So yes. I now support this change Your ignorance of actual c5-6 mechanics and your jabber comment is telling and reduces your post to irrelevace. thx for playing. |
Lenroc Elisav
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 08:52:00 -
[853] - Quote
You got hotheaded and are not thinking straight. If you managed to solo close a WH with two hostile fleets around, props to you, but those fleets (better said their FCs) sucked hard or they didn't give a rats ass about you and instead were chasing each other. You know that there are tactics developed to catch rolling caps, right? So you prefer to not have the option to boldly close a hole but instead to POS up and spin, sounds legit! Even if I am to concede that it would be better to increase the risk involved in rolling a C5/C6 hole I still think this proposed way of mass-based spawn (which may put offensive caps 40km apart) isn't the way to do it. A solution that causes a bigger problem that the one that it solves is not a good solution.
I agree with you that isolating system in order to farm should not be possible but that could be easily solved by having the static force spawn (no matter if it was interacted with by players - scanned, warped too etc) on a timer (5 minutes so active players can scan it and have the upper hand if they are on an offensive prowl) and the K162 on the other side 15 (let's say) minutes later (or/and at first jump as proposed). Or at least make the K162 visible and interact able with. I think we should charge CCP money for all these great solutions we are throwing at them .
|
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
473
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 08:59:00 -
[854] - Quote
Anize Oramara wrote:calaretu wrote:So yes. I now support this change Your ignorance of actual c5-6 mechanics and your jabber comment is telling and reduces your post to irrelevace. thx for playing. And you are supposed to be a massively more relevant because...?
W-Space Realtor |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 09:35:00 -
[855] - Quote
Lenroc Elisav wrote:You got hotheaded and are not thinking straight. If you managed to solo close a WH with two hostile fleets around, props to you, but those fleets (better said their FCs) sucked hard or they didn't give a rats ass about you and instead were chasing each other. You know that there are tactics developed to catch rolling caps, right? So you prefer to not have the option to boldly close a hole but instead to POS up and spin, sounds legit! Even if I am to concede that it would be better to increase the risk involved in rolling a C5/C6 hole I still think this proposed way of mass-based spawn (which may put offensive caps 40km apart) isn't the way to do it. A solution that causes a bigger problem that the one that it solves is not a good solution. I agree with you that isolating system in order to farm should not be possible but that could be easily solved by having the static force spawn (no matter if it was interacted with by players - scanned, warped too etc) on a timer (5 minutes so active players can scan it and have the upper hand if they are on an offensive prowl) and the K162 on the other side 15 (let's say) minutes later (or/and at first jump as proposed). Or at least make the K162 visible and interact able with. I think we should charge CCP money for all these great solutions we are throwing at them . EDIT - And absent rage rolling farming will be even safer. Granted one won't be able to schedule it but still safer when it will occur.
and yet the outcome will be ultimately decided regardless of all the feedback and solutions given. |
Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 10:21:00 -
[856] - Quote
Lenroc Elisav wrote:You got hotheaded and are not thinking straight. If you managed to solo close a WH with two hostile fleets around, props to you, but those fleets (better said their FCs) sucked hard or they didn't give a rats ass about you and instead were chasing each other.
Or the "fleets" consisted of empty ships sitting in a POS that he saw on dscan. |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3641
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 10:39:00 -
[857] - Quote
calaretu wrote:Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options. But I could do it risk free. Their fleets wasnt on 0 on wormhole. Thats whats wrong imo. The risk free part. And its only in 5/6-5/6 you have the option of instaclosing. Shoukd small groups be able to live in these systems? I suggest perhaps not. A lot of other systems to live in. And we are making this move ourself as our active numbers had a drop. So yes I dont support the argument that small groups should be able to live in 5/6-5/6 it is NOT risk free. ive killed MANY people closing WHs before and expect to do it again in the future. It isnt hard and there is VERY real risk involved in combat rolling and anyone claiming otherwise is either lying or incompetent. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Winthorp
2524
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 10:47:00 -
[858] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options. But I could do it risk free. Their fleets wasnt on 0 on wormhole. Thats whats wrong imo. The risk free part. And its only in 5/6-5/6 you have the option of instaclosing. Shoukd small groups be able to live in these systems? I suggest perhaps not. A lot of other systems to live in. And we are making this move ourself as our active numbers had a drop. So yes I dont support the argument that small groups should be able to live in 5/6-5/6 it is NOT risk free. ive killed MANY people closing WHs before and expect to do it again in the future. It isnt hard and there is VERY real risk involved in combat rolling and anyone claiming otherwise is either lying or incompetent.
The point is you have killed stupid people that can't log a simple scout on, once they have a scout they are 100% safe and if they know they are not they don't roll it.
But you can always count on stupid Jack.
It actually disappoints me CCP has listened to all the whining here and is changing this to be more carebear friendly. |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 11:00:00 -
[859] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:Jack Miton wrote:calaretu wrote:I have solo closed wormholes in the face of two! hostile fleets. I can not fathom how anyone can call that good game mechanics. if the alternative is your little corp not getting to do anything until the larger corp goes away? yes, I say it is good game mechanics as it allows small corps to continue looking for content when they cant interact with their current chain options. But I could do it risk free. Their fleets wasnt on 0 on wormhole. Thats whats wrong imo. The risk free part. And its only in 5/6-5/6 you have the option of instaclosing. Shoukd small groups be able to live in these systems? I suggest perhaps not. A lot of other systems to live in. And we are making this move ourself as our active numbers had a drop. So yes I dont support the argument that small groups should be able to live in 5/6-5/6 it is NOT risk free. ive killed MANY people closing WHs before and expect to do it again in the future. It isnt hard and there is VERY real risk involved in combat rolling and anyone claiming otherwise is either lying or incompetent. The point is you have killed stupid people that can't log a simple scout on, once they have a scout they are 100% safe and if they know they are not they don't roll it. But you can always count on stupid Jack. It actually disappoints me CCP has listened to all the whining here and is changing this to be more carebear friendly.
unlike now you could simply roll even when it wasnt safe. AFter change, nope. STuck, log off. |
Winthorp
2524
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 11:05:00 -
[860] - Quote
Pavel Sohaj wrote:
unlike now you could simply roll even when it wasn't safe. AFter change, nope. STuck, log off.
So log off and cry me a river. You rolling your chain safely and then continuing to carebear away benefits no one.
You logging off cause it wasn't perfectly safe for you to achieve a Wh with no entry points actually benefits the rest of the players that actually only PVE to PVP by increasing the value of MNR's when all you whining carebears can't farm more then you should be. |
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 11:08:00 -
[861] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Pavel Sohaj wrote:
unlike now you could simply roll even when it wasn't safe. AFter change, nope. STuck, log off.
So log off and cry me a river. You rolling your chain safely and then continuing to carebear away benefits no one. You logging off cause it wasn't perfectly safe for you to achieve a Wh with no entry points actually benefits the rest of the players that actually only PVE to PVP by increasing the value of MNR's when all you whining carebears can't farm more then you should be.
lol, so much hate. Well, expected. Your hateful comments that obviously have no respect for anybody are really great. You are such great guy to have around. I wonder how, with such attitude and opinions, you expect to find ppl in WH. Sure, occasional explorers are there and surely you grow big when you shoot a heron on sun, prolly claiming to be pvp god of the week, no doubt.
But then try for once, with a reason, to reply to a simple question : How does affecting peoples ability to create content help the game? Since small groups will have it much tougher now and they are part of the game too, despite your inability and unwillingess to see it. |
Anize Oramara
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
224
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 11:34:00 -
[862] - Quote
Perfectly safe huh? Strange... all those farming fleets that collapsed all their wormholes including their static and was watching scanner window constantly and still got killed must be a figment of our imagination and a glitch on zkillboard.
what a joke. you sir are a joke. |
Katerin Archer
Total. Fractal Multiversity
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 11:49:00 -
[863] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:
So log off and cry me a river. You rolling your chain safely and then continuing to carebear away benefits no one.
You logging off cause it wasn't perfectly safe for you to achieve a Wh with no entry points actually benefits the rest of the players that actually only PVE to PVP by increasing the value of MNR's when all you whining carebears can't farm more then you should be.
I remind you that "whining carebears" are a part of EvE economy, balanced around PLEXes, many of us also go balls deep into building your T3 stuff you fly and never going to make, because you already play "Excel in space" and doing "Excel as is" is over the top for most "nice guys" like you. So, if you claim that you know how much we should be farming, please, shed some light on concrete numbers or have Fozzie to grow up enough balls to tell us in face that we can go fozz ourselves because he or his predecessor(s) failed hard on the design and or balance , at least both sides will have a great relief getting rid of ridiculous bulls***.
Thanks in advance.
P.S.: Never cried a river after a shiny loss, leave alone the dirt cheap T2s and T3s we fly in W-systems. Every ship I fly is not only effective, but efficient, if you think it isn't, that you underestimate my scale =) |
Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 12:01:00 -
[864] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote: it is NOT risk free. ive killed MANY people closing WHs before and expect to do it again in the future. It isnt hard and there is VERY real risk involved in combat rolling and anyone claiming otherwise is either lying or incompetent.
This is what Fozzie isn't getting - its already dangerous to roll holes. Maybe something needs to be done to make insta-rolling no longer possible, but this change as-proposed breaks too many other good things about wormholes to get at the behavior change he's looking for.
This is like a classic CCP sledgehammer nerf to a mechanic that was working fine as-is for most WH dwellers. If any change was required to deny insta-rolling it could be done much more subtlely than this, frankly. |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
752
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 15:34:00 -
[865] - Quote
Katerin Archer wrote:Winthorp wrote:
So log off and cry me a river. You rolling your chain safely and then continuing to carebear away benefits no one.
You logging off cause it wasn't perfectly safe for you to achieve a Wh with no entry points actually benefits the rest of the players that actually only PVE to PVP by increasing the value of MNR's when all you whining carebears can't farm more then you should be.
I remind you that "whining carebears" are a part of EvE economy, balanced around PLEXes, many of us also go balls deep into building your T3 stuff you fly and never going to make, because you already play "Excel in space" and doing "Excel as is" is over the top for most "nice guys" like you. So, if you claim that you know how much we should be farming, please, shed some light on concrete numbers or have Fozzie to grow up enough balls to tell us in face that we can go fozz ourselves because he or his predecessor(s) failed hard on the design and or balance , at least both sides will have a great relief getting rid of ridiculous bulls***. Thanks in advance. P.S.: Never cried a river after a shiny loss, leave alone the dirt cheap T2s and T3s we fly in W-systems. Every ship I fly is not only effective, but efficient, if you think it isn't, that you underestimate my scale =)
lol @ farming sleepers = having balls |
SalubriousSky Rinah
Cryptic Spear Space Warriors
30
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 16:20:00 -
[866] - Quote
TL;DR...if mentioned already, then apologies.
CCP seem intent on making changes to Bob's WHs (I'm wondering if they have actually consulted Bob on this occasion as well) in the form of these ludicrous mass based spawn distances...
You're not going to make things any easier or riskier for WH people because they are a very resourceful group of players...perhaps the most resourceful and inventive in the game. The only thing you are achieveing here is demonstrating your complete lack of insight into their way of life and quite frankly a very short sighted view of how PvP works in capital class WH systems. Holes will still be rage rolled using capitals or not, it may just take MORE TIME.
Let's be honest, we were not supposed to live in WHs, and so in theory they really aren't capsuleer friendly...just look at the awful state of POS mechanics, which you have yet to tackle. And since less than, what, 5% of all players live in WH space, we're not really much of a 'real-world' money sink for your profit margins, i.e. subs etc.
So, instead of making this a Mass-Based Spawn DISTANCE change, why don't you make it a Mass-Based Spawn TIME change and be done with it. Why not make the polarisation times dependent upon the mass of the ship, but still keep the same spawn distance mechanics that exist in game. Please note, I am only suggesting the course of action, because you seem hell bent on making some kind of change to WH mechanics.
So for example, a beloved carrier would get pretty much instantly polarised upon jumping, whereas a battleship would say have to wait 2 minutes before jumping back...idk, in my mind this would actually encourage more PvP fleet hole rolling since guys would have to jump through to defend their corp mates if they were engaged on the other side.
Just a thought, I doubt you will implement such a change this late in the game...but at the end of the day, the message to CCP is also pretty clear - DON'T FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN (in the first place).
Sal |
Ned Black
Driders
78
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 16:27:00 -
[867] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Faren Shalni wrote:So thats the Second dev blog stating that this change is happening......THEN WHATS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD IF UR JUST GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY
also wtf with the nestor? I just listened to fozzie talking on down the pipe, He is clear that all options of keeping it, changing it, or removing it are on the table and they are closely watching these forums before they make a final decision. That seems fair and reasonable, no matter how much we dislike this new feature. As for the Nestor, it is too expensive and still insufficiently defined, hopefully that will change. I still cannot find a role for it other than bait.
Sounds like stalling to me...
At least if you start looking att CCPs track record about unpopular changes
The ONLY time I am aware of CCP backpaddeling is with the P2W debacle, and that was not even a change but an internal news letter... after 5-10k canceled their accounds within a week or so... other than that... I have no recollection of CCP backing up on a new feature ever... they may "tweak" it, but it WILL come no matter what people say in this thread. |
Dr Cormack
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 16:51:00 -
[868] - Quote
BU noobs left w-space. Bha. Noone cares. |
Anize Oramara
EVE Protection Agency Bloodline.
224
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 18:26:00 -
[869] - Quote
Ned Black wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Faren Shalni wrote:So thats the Second dev blog stating that this change is happening......THEN WHATS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD IF UR JUST GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY
also wtf with the nestor? I just listened to fozzie talking on down the pipe, He is clear that all options of keeping it, changing it, or removing it are on the table and they are closely watching these forums before they make a final decision. That seems fair and reasonable, no matter how much we dislike this new feature. As for the Nestor, it is too expensive and still insufficiently defined, hopefully that will change. I still cannot find a role for it other than bait. Sounds like stalling to me... At least if you start looking att CCPs track record about unpopular changes The ONLY time I am aware of CCP backpaddeling is with the P2W debacle, and that was not even a change but an internal news letter... after 5-10k canceled their accounds within a week or so... other than that... I have no recollection of CCP backing up on a new feature ever... they may "tweak" it, but it WILL come no matter what people say in this thread. I only know of the Relic/Data site loot can spew that they EVENTUALLY retracted, but that was because people found out how to horrendously game it to completely break the market for those items. Like I don't know if data discs will ever recover.
I will be super surprised if this change doesn't go through. CCP's track record is abysmal for listening to their playerbase.
|
Jack Branigan
Deadspace Knights
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 19:57:00 -
[870] - Quote
Anize Oramara wrote: I will be super surprised if this change doesn't go through. CCP's track record is abysmal for listening to their playerbase.
I don't agree with that at all. There are numerous things that have changed due to player complains. Off the top of my head
-freighter rigs (now low slots) -expanded walking in stations (scrapped due to player complaints) -loot spew mechanic (nobody liked this) -warping to only within 10km (prior to warp to 0) Although it is argued this was only because the server was getting full from everyone's warp to points they were saving in every single system....
Now that being said I hope they listen to the screaming masses on this topic. This idea is terrible. As multiple others have said it's not going to create PVP content at all. More prevent it and loss of subs will follow.
I myself have been training for the last 6 months to fly a Nag with near perfect skills. Now within 3 weeks of being able to fly it they drop this bomb. My corp has already talked about leaving our WH as we would not be able to effectively defend a dread 20 km from the hole and closing with BS would take so long it wouldn't even be worth while. If my corp does decide to exodus out of our WH I will have essentially spent the last half a year wasting training time. THAT in itself is enough that I won't feel like playing this game anymore. I know I can go to null sec for capital fights but that's not what I enjoyed about eve. I continued playing because I enjoyed wh space. Other than the lack of spawning k162's this entire patch just feels like an assault on WH dwellers.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 81 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |