|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 41 post(s) |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
299
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 19:36:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ahahaha, full ****** achieved. WTB characters so I can fatigue them to infinite before flipping them. |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
299
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 20:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The Cue wrote:Will warp speeds be adjusted? Capitals warp exceptionally slow as it is.
Probably not, no.
LOLOLOL You do know the exact next patch is when you're going to have to up the warp speeds, right? Capitals are intolerably slow. Heck I'm surprised you haven't bumped the BS ones up yet already.
Quote:Coreemo wrote:Also, the whole "fix" to deathcloning is a really bad idea. We need SOME way to quickly deploy to a hot area that requires it. Why? (Serious question.)
Because these changes already coddle the risk averse- you guys literally use the reasoning of people being scared of someone moving across the entire map to drop. That's being risk averse. (It also rarely happens, and when it does tends to be a very intricately set up thing involving a lot of forethought and planning.)
Quote: *Every* controversial change hurts the little guy too much. It's good that all the big guys are there to look out for them.
Newsflash- your players actually play the game. Not all of them rushed to the biggest entity and some people are, in fact, actually able to look at the consequences of your changes for all groups without being wrapped up in the "I made this" pride you guys always have when told what is wrong.
As to black ops and your continued bafflement at why they keep being brought up:
Black Ops are a ganking tool, not a fleet combat one. They are lightly tanked, not particularly impressive dps, and essentially the main thing they have going for them is that ability to pop in, gank, and then disappear (cloak or otherwise). They are not something that will stand to most fleets of any kind so their potential for abuse in the areas you're targetting is pretty low. That you guys need this explained is a bit laughable, since you can't even first look at their function and maybe piece it together yourselves.
Not adjusting them leaves them with essentially no niche and will require future adjustments that do exactly what your players are suggesting or even an entire overhaul on them that gives them some other purpose.
|
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
299
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 20:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps. Why not- after this? (Serious question) |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
301
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 20:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps. Why not- after this? (Serious question) Because I took the ability to do so away from them almost exactly three years ago, and the reasons for doing so still hold :)
But now there is an increased susceptibility of them to subcaps- being permabumped when attempting to align to the next gate as an example. If supers traveling via gates should be possible if not preferred, then should they not also now have means to defend themselves?
Also the situations then were that you could suddenly appear from a much more sizeable distance and pop in to alpha off key targets. The distance one can do that from now is lessened quite a bit without exhausting your character's fatigue for some time. Adding that option back in gives people more reason to field their supers- which many will now be hesitant to do. It creates a huge tactical choice of "well do we waste a month of our characters' ability to quickly move on this one fight?"
|
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
303
|
Posted - 2014.10.01 21:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kat Ayclism wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Kat Ayclism wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps. Why not- after this? (Serious question) Because I took the ability to do so away from them almost exactly three years ago, and the reasons for doing so still hold :) But now there is an increased susceptibility of them to subcaps- being permabumped when attempting to align to the next gate as an example. If supers traveling via gates should be possible if not preferred, then should they not also now have means to defend themselves?
As I mentioned earlier, there are solutions to this already, and I'm sure people will figure them out.[/quote] So... sit on our largely useless super accounts for... umm... what reason then?
You seem to think we're blind to the solutions you're talking about, rather than saying that they are... unsatisfactory and provide little reason to maintain those accounts. This happens often- you're told what the use will be after you propose a change, and rather than respond to it you handwave it off. People are going to be extremely reluctant to field their supers, smaller groups even more so than before. Not giving them minor things like the ability to defend themselves against a constant bump is short-sighted on your part.
I'll note that you entirely ignored that you have drastically changed the tactical situation that existed when you initially made the change, and are overlooking the potential for creating some very very tough decisions. Decisions that would further encourage actually using those ships you're about to system-shock. |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
307
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 17:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The Ironfist wrote:CCP Greyscale once this is though and we wont or can't get to far away conflicts anymore were will we get our conflict you know content? What are you doing to make sure there will be local conflict? Because right now most nullsec space is not even worth fighting over much less holding it other then for renting it out? Are you going to address the fact that nullsec is especially worthless? That's a question I'd suggest you ask your leaders, not us.
This *IS* a problem. You need to have conflict drivers beyond just "eh... let's go **** with these dudes." It's really not giving much confidence in the things to come after this if that is the type of response you have. Right now, and apparently in the future judging by that response there is little reason to go fight over some place.
You have the stick. You're brandishing the stick wildly. Now listen to your players and at least show some regard for the need of a carrot. |
Kat Ayclism
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
308
|
Posted - 2014.10.02 17:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
With the changes to movement there's something else that needs looked at a bit more closely
Anchorable Bubbles
The cost on them is quite low, the only require maintenance if killed off, and they are quite hellacios for capitals with low mobility to get out of.
Rather than suggest a capital MJU or something silly, I'd like to suggest that anchorable bubbles be tweaked to require some amount of maintenance.
Be that fueling them as with POSes or with redeploying them as one currently does with the mobile depots/mobile cyno jammers/etc...
The amount of safety that set-it-and-forget-it anchorable bubbles provide in an environment of much lower mobility is completely out of skew. So make it something that requires maintenance and actively being in that area to some amount in order to disrupt movement. This introduces an amount of risk as you may get caught out while maintaining your bubbles and it means you're in the area so you may draw someone hunting you after going all "grr bubbles." This also prevents a single person from creating a highly disruptive bubble path- it does not stop a focused entity from doing it though, and actually makes it more rewarding to have people focused on disruptive behavior, which opens up a lot of tactical gameplay. |
|
|
|