|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1074
   |
Posted - 2011.11.23 16:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
Please discuss issues related to this session in this thread. We look forward to your comments and suggestions.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1077
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 10:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bomberlocks wrote:Trebor, Two Step, please go though Hans Jagerblitzen's thread on FW improvements carefully, so that there is no wasted effort on FW.
Will do.
WRT ice in WH's, this is by design, to prevent WH's from being self-sufficient.
Super Chair: I agree in general with these ideas.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1077
|
Posted - 2011.11.25 22:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tahna Rouspel wrote:It doesn't make sense to me. Why is it wrong to have wormhole self-sufficient on an equal level to null-sec? I hear nullsec has access to ice.
IIRC a concern at the time is that if WH's were self-sufficient, they would quickly be colonized by nullsec alliances and used as secure production facilities.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1081
|
Posted - 2011.11.27 11:15:00 -
[4] - Quote
Cearain wrote:EVE is blob warfare by design. 1000 ship fights make the news in the gamer websites. Players who don't like that leave and have left. Therefore the csm is going to be players who don't mind the blob and have no real interest in mechanics for small scale and solo pvp.
FW isn't going to be something that csm can champion. It's entirely too foreign to them. It will have to be ccp that decides they will finally implement a mechanic that promotes frequent quality small scale pvp.
QFT. The current game design has a greater-than-unity power scaling function for fleets -- it's almost always, if not always, increasing the size of your fleet, which leads to a mutual runaway to the blob. I raised this issue in my original CSM5 campaign, coining "fleets expand to fit the lag available".
TiDi will address some of the technical issues with lag, but it also opens headroom to permit even larger blobs, so it's only really buying time; eventually the fleets will get big enough to make the TiDi factor so large that it'll be unplayable. CCP really needs to change the mechanics to get away from the "dirtbag is primary, everyone shoot dirtbag. douchenozzle is secondary..." blob fights we have now.
WRT FW, if changes are made that make it more popular without addressing the underlying combat mechanics issues the game faces, it'll just blob up.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1081
|
Posted - 2011.11.28 12:37:00 -
[5] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
WRT FW, if changes are made that make it more popular without addressing the underlying combat mechanics issues the game faces, it'll just blob up.
Could you elaborate a little more on what you meant by this? I was wondering which changes you are referring to in terms of popularity, and which underlying mechanics issues you speak of.
I am not referring to any specific changes. My point is that if you wave a magic wand and make FW perfect in every respect, so that lots of people want to do it, it'll just blob up. And that this can only be fixed by game mechanics changes that make blobs over a certain size non-optimal.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
Trebor Daehdoow
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
1085
|
Posted - 2011.12.02 10:29:00 -
[6] - Quote
Alticus C Bear wrote:There are a lot of good discussions surrounding both topics within this thread and others, do you read and take note of other thread content?
One of the things I'll do this weekend is write up notes about the threads.
Alticus C Bear wrote:I understand a lot of what you may champion on our behalf will be down to your own logic and preferences but will you highlight the GÇ£little thingsGÇ¥ that the CSM will be taking to CCP? Or Is CCP expected to monitor this thread and prepare to discuss relevant points?
I don't expect them to do it formally, but some devs may do it informally. CSM meetings tend to be more high-level than particular feature discussions, but the lists are still helpful, especially if a CSM doesn't have direct experience with a particular aspect of the game. And we can point the devs to the thread.
Alticus C Bear wrote:Do you all have personal lists or is there a more generic agenda of items worked out for the CSM as a whole?
We usually write up a shared document (in etherpad, for example) to keep notes.
I try not to let my personal preferences influence me too much. That's one reason I did the crowdsourcing.
CSM - because I have not yet plumbed the depths of my inherent masochism!
CSM 6 Activities Summary | My CSM blog |
|
|
| |
|