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 .. 78 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 38 post(s) |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2654
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 00:31:00 -
[931] - Quote
Perseus Kallistratos wrote:Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Silva told us you guys are scurred. lol
If Silva was actually involved in anything other than renter customer service your information might have carried some merit. . . . . . . . . lol
Silva telling more lies, why I never.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions Stain Confederation
414
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 00:33:00 -
[932] - Quote
Darryl Brown wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:The maths given in that example is incorrect. 11.025 means a jump cooldown of 11 minutes. You seem to think that means you are "done for the day", which indicates you are misunderstanding something. Why would that mean you are done for the day?
Also just to clarify something. Is it ( 1 + fatigue ) * 'fatigue reduction factor' OR 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' ?
BTW the first point is directed at Darryl. I think it would be a 50% reduction to jump distance counted - so 1+50% of ly which I think corresponds with your "1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor'". And to clarify - by "done for the day" I mean that the consequences of a third jump (after the jump cool down wears off but with 10ish fatigue) would result in a huge jump cool down and fatigue timer. Using another 5 ly jump as an example, it would be 10 x 3.5 = 35 fatigue. And that would be 5.7 hours to get down below 1 fatigue. Eww. But thank you for checking my math. Math in a forum for a game with a player-base like this is like doing math on the chalkboard in my Calc II class years ago. Nerve-wracking! Ok that makes more sense. Although I still don't see the problem with the 50% reduction.
Lets take two examples. I'm assuming that 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' is the correct formula as that seems to be the consensus.
Example 1. Hit and run type drop, 4LY from staging system.
Target 1 = 4LY Current Fatigue = 0 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 3 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 3 ( 20 minutes to reduce )
Waiting Time = 3 mins
Target 2 = 4LY Current Fatigue = 3 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 3 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 2.7 * 3 = 8.1 ( 1H 11 minutes to reduce )
End of Session
Example 2. Sustained multi hot drop.
Target 1 = 3LY Current Fatigue = 0 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 2.5 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 2.5 ( 15 minutes to reduce )
Waiting Time = 20 mins
Target 2 = 6LY Current Fatigue = 0 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 4 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 4 ( 30 minutes to reduce )
Waiting Time = 20 mins
Target 3 = 4LY Current Fatigue = 2 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 3 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 2 * 3 = 6 ( 50 minutes to reduce )
Waiting Time = 20 mins
Target 4 = 5LY Current Fatigue = 4 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 3.5 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 4 * 3.5 = 14 ( 2H 10 minutes to reduce )
Waiting Time = 20 mins
Target 5 = 8LY Current Fatigue = 12 Jump Cooldown = MAX ( 1 + 'fatigue' * 'fatigue reduction factor' , 1 + Jump LY * 'fatigue reduction factor' ) = 7 mins Jump Fatigue accrued = 12 * 7 = 84 ( 13H 50 minutes to reduce )
End of Session
This shows that with a 50% fatigue reduction, you will still be able to do hit and run type black ops drops, alongside more sustained methods of 5 or more drops in one session if you are smart. This seems perfectly reasonable to me and needs to adjustment other than perhaps reducing the black ops maximum range to 6 LY. |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2655
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 00:53:00 -
[933] - Quote
I think you'll see this add more layers to a sustained blops operation.
Currently if you're hunting an area the cyno goes up and everything jumps for the kill, but after an entity that wants to do sustained Blops operations over a region will tier their response to tackled prey.
Is it just a hauler or maybe a battlecruiser?
Squad One jumps to the cyno.
Is it a 10 man gate camp in the targets home system?
Maybe Squad One and Squad Two jump.
Tackled Carrier?
Wing 1 Jump.
This kind of limited release allows a fleet of a 50 black ops guys to constantly police an area without too much down time. Smaller groups will of course have to vary that response and or avoid certain situations but with smaller groups there is always a tighter coordination among a gangs members so even 10 or 20 guys can keep two hunters busy without fatigue. Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
AzTrackGuy
Lions Of Judah Black Core Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:04:00 -
[934] - Quote
Querns wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Rorquals will stay at 5LY/90%
Is there a reason that Rorquals don't get the same 10LY range as JFs? Rorquals are used just as much for logistics as JFs, especially because their actual intended use isn't really...useful. We didn't think it was sensible to let it keep its drone bonus and have a 10LY range, and at the end of the day the bonus won out. The ship needs a large rework anyway, and we'll revisit all this when that happens :) I think anyone who is sane would willingly trade the drone damage bonus on rorquals for the extended range. If you're going to rework the ship anyways, this is the clear sacrifice to make. Hell, replace the drone damage bonus on the hull with 20% additional jump range per level.
agreed, especially since most people such as myself only use the rorq as pos mining booster & a poor mans JF, i'd trade unused drone bonuses for jump range in a second
"If you put forth the effort to succeed... you will" |
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:04:00 -
[935] - Quote
I'm not sure why this has to be so complicated, restrictive and punitive.
The easiest way to reduce force projection with capitals would be to set a minimum jump timer "to the ship". Reduce maximum range to 5LY, with 10 mins between jumps for the 1st 20LY (4 jumps in 40 minutes) increasing to 15 mins for each subsequent jump. Every time the jump drive is activated, whether it be 2 LY or 5 LY incurs the timer.
Gate travel could reduce the "jump drive timer" by 2 min per gate + real time. IE; jump 5 LY incur 10 min cool down to next jump - moving through 5 gates you can then jump 5 LY. As capitals take a while to navigate gate to gate, you could potentially go through 2 or 3 gates to reset the timer. If you want to get from A to B as quickly as possible, gate travel is the only way to do it.
Capital Ships, not the pilots should have the restrictions.
The same could be used for titan bridging, if a titan lights a jump portal there is a 10 min cool down before it can be lit again. Miss the 1st bridge, you have to wait 10 mins or use gates. Jump bridging could work the same way, as it is the ship that is restricted (not the pilot). Use a jump bridge or titan bridge you have to wait out the timer or use gates before you can do it again. If force projection with subcaps using jump bridges, titan bridges is an issue, set a mass limit on jump portals, once that mass limit is reached the portal becomes inactive for a period of time. Maximum size for a "fleet" is 250, so the mass limit could be set at say 300 jumps in a given 30 min period with a cool down of 10 mins, so the use of a bridge by a small fleet or random jumps does not shut it down for a large fleet move.
Jump freighters, Rorquals and Blops gangs would be effected by the same timers but without the range restrictions. Range for these could remain as it is now but making consecutive jumps over long distances would be much slower. Gate travel would reduce timers as with capitals.
A visible timer, like current timers, could be displayed for the ship, if it takes you 45 seconds to travel from gate to gate you would see 2 mins 45 seconds come off the timer. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions Stain Confederation
414
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:24:00 -
[936] - Quote
Greyscale, is there any chance you could cap fatigue at a maximum of 100?
In the 3 scenarios that would play out as shown below.
Maximum time possible to completely clear fatigue = 16H 30M
Capital Ship Maximum possible jump cooldown = 100 * 6 = 9H 50M
Black Ops Maximum possible jump cooldown = 100 * 5 = 8H 10M
Hauler Maximum possible jump cooldown = 100 * 1.1 = 1H 40M
Capping the maximum fatigue at 100 would mean that no one would ever be punished for more than 16 hours 30 minutes, and would still mean jump cooldown is at a prohibitive level when you raise your fatigue too greatly.
And I certainly can't see any good gameplay reason to allow the fatigue to raise higher than 200 at a maximum. |
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
606
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:37:00 -
[937] - Quote
Blops are still fairly useless even with 50% fatigue.
EvE-Mail me if you need anything. |
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions Stain Confederation
414
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:38:00 -
[938] - Quote
Arya Regnar wrote:Blops are still fairly useless even with 50% fatigue. Read my post a couple of replies above, you'll find they are still perfectly viable. |
JC Anderson
State Protectorate Caldari State
1164
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 01:39:00 -
[939] - Quote
Celly S wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: BEfore jf EXISTED, BEFORE JUMP BRIDGES AND before INVETION existed. A HAC costed 300M isk..
So stop exagerating. These changes woould NOT have an impact of more than 20-30% on the prices.
you're leaving out the devaluation of the isk, IDK if you're doing it intentionally, or just didn't think about it, so let me add some information that actually validates the guy's statement. "back then, a PLEX DIDN'T cost 800m isks either" "back then, your isks bought more" (so 300m then would be allot closer to 800m today than you may want to admit) "as recently as 4 years ago, the PLEX prices were about 1 quarter of what they are today" Economics 101... just saying o/ Celly Smunt
There was no PLEX back then. :P Just GTC you bought from 3rd parties. And it wasn't an in-game item so it was really easy to get scammed.
I do however remember average prices for a Raven navy issue being well over a billion isk. Most tech 1 tier 1 battleships were around 130mil. The Cerberus, and some of the other HACS averaged between 240-300mil. |
Antoinette Amelana
Lom Corporation Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:01:00 -
[940] - Quote
These changes overall continue to be punitive for logistics pilots. I can't believe that I would continue to pay for the privilege of having to wait to play. This is just ludicrous. Do what you want to capitals but leave the Rorq and the JF alone. NOT EVERYONE IS A PVP'er. This is probably the first indication that EveOnline is on its way out. It's too bad as I actually enjoyed playing. |
|
HiddenPorpoise
Under Dark Sins of our Fathers
271
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:02:00 -
[941] - Quote
Does a Blops using another Blops's tunnel get 75% reduction? |
Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
299
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:23:00 -
[942] - Quote
JC Anderson wrote: There was no PLEX back then. :P Just GTC you bought from 3rd parties. And it wasn't an in-game item so it was really easy to get scammed.
I do however remember average prices for a Raven navy issue being well over a billion isk. Most tech 1 tier 1 battleships were around 130mil. The Cerberus, and some of the other HACS averaged between 240-300mil.
So strangely enough... Some things were cheaper... Some a lot more.
You are 100% correct, if we take the "way back" machine there weren't any PLEX, but even as recently as 4-5 years the prices have changed drastically. I also think that like many items, The CNR's price was based on it's abilities, and I can remember when flying that meant that you had plenty of your own "power projection" *wink*
Good point though, and thanks for the trip down memory lane :P
o/ Celly Smunt
Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
Yun Kuai
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
228
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:38:00 -
[943] - Quote
Agata Kristi wrote:Greyscale you really do need to consider the timer for capitals again. While I think it is a good idea, it needs a better implementation method. It needs to be a set figure, not an accumulative one. Your current system will make fleets or ops impossible as an fc would need to consider everyone's. As I've said before, a set timer would have the same impact, without limiting peoples play time ( as your current system does, who would want a month long wait for decay?). A set timer of say 10 mins before jumping again removes and accumulation of waiting, therefore not limiting peoples actual play time while still reducing power projection. Please consider this, as the current system either needs a drastic change or caps just with be feasible
Well first off, why is it's the FC's responsibility to determine if an individual players can make the route. It would be very simple to say if you have X fatigue you can make it. If you don't reach the requirement, if not you'll need to do manual jumps in between and might get killed, etc. this is good for the overall game as it means players have to do more than "F1" in more areas of the game. The good FCs and good players will adapt.
The other point people seem to be missing. If you're in your own space why is it not okay to jump your cap manually through the gate. At least in current nullsec, it's stupid empty so the risk is pretty much non-existent. It also means you don't accrue any unnecessary fatigue. If the changes really do make nullsec exciting again with roaming gangs all the time, well this might be more risky but I don't see that happening with current nullsec cartel leadership's mentality. --------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::------- |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6441
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:46:00 -
[944] - Quote
Yun Kuai wrote:Well first off, why is it's the FC's responsibility to determine if an individual players can make the route. It would be very simple to say if you have X fatigue you can make it. If you don't reach the requirement, if not you'll need to do manual jumps in between and might get killed, etc. this is good for the overall game as it means players have to do more than "F1" in more areas of the game. The good FCs and good players will adapt. Hah, actually this means "if you are above X fatigue then stand down".
Of course blobbers are fine with this. You need to meet some sort of threshold, so obviously it is good if less others are able to reach it. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Praal
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
10
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:49:00 -
[945] - Quote
There's more hindering null industry than just availability of resources.
Supplying null with pure local production faces the obstacle that if you produce enough of one item for it to be worth the effort, you do not have enough clients to use it. If you make small amounts of a variety of items your clients need, then you are faced with a huge amount of tedium. And if you make small amounts of a few items, it's not enough to sustain you as an industrialist.
And there's no easy solution to this because you can't artificially create bigger markets in null, nor can you reduce the tedium of making many different items without making materials/invention completely one dimensional.
My suggestion would be to stimulate null industry by making producing in null better in itself. Make costs lower in null and higher in hisec (better material reduction on null-only POS modules/station upgrades, etc). Make goo harder to move long distances (say it's unstable or something and can't be jumped around), but reshuffle moons (and recipes) so each zone is well suited to a certain group of items. Promote universe-wide logistics/trade of built stuff.
For example make Catch be suited to produce Lasers in the W part, cap mods in the S part, armor hardeners in the N and drones in the E part. But if we want Blasters we'd either produce them inefficiently or trade with manufacturers from S Fountain, N Perrigen or W Deklein. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6441
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 02:53:00 -
[946] - Quote
I see, so you mean that vince draken's boys might be optimally suited for producing ragnaroks and hels.
Hmm.... terrifying. ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
1674
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 03:23:00 -
[947] - Quote
Okay, some notes from the thread, probably two posts
I have been a big advocate of changes being done in the same manner as focusing a microscope. Coarse focus and then fine and for gods sake stop driving the lens through the slide. The first threadnaught? First twist of thew knob. Nobody expects to hit focus on the first try. So then they listened, looked, thought about it and this thread is the second twist. Look back through it. You are engaged in small arguments but aside from a few trolls there is not a lot of 'oh gods . . . this is the end of it all' Matter of fact a lot of you seem almost happy. wierd. Maybe (just maybe) it is because they did listen and so did we (we being the CSM) and we argued for the key points. Amazingly I was in favour of not hitting the blops as hard and easing off on the Logistics.
wow
Kinda scary when they listen to you.
Now go back to page 40 and Greyscales post. IF (I said if, not when) the expansion turns out to be exploitable to some ridiculous degree then actions will be taken. So even if you are sure it is a mistake . . . and it might be (whatever 'it' is for you) then be patient.
No, they are not going to tell you in this thread the entire roadmap, but nice try and no harm in asking.
Yes, they probably will have some explanation for the whats and whys, lore wise. Being a filthy RP kinda guy I am looking forward to that.
Over all I would say the tone, the mood, of this thread is far far different from the last. Maybe because it is coming into focus? Maybe because everybody burned out on the last one.
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
xXThe EntityXx
screwtaxesyo420blazeitswag
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 03:28:00 -
[948] - Quote
I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6441
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 03:30:00 -
[949] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Yes, they probably will have some explanation for the whats and whys, lore wise. Being a filthy RP kinda guy I am looking forward to that. What did they give for the doomsdays being non-aoe, then capital only?
Or for the supercarriers forgetting how to use normal drones
Mike Azariah wrote:Over all I would say the tone, the mood, of this thread is far far different from the last. Maybe because it is coming into focus? Maybe because everybody burned out on the last one. Op success. Jam it in there while there's less resistance due to forums fatigue ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Kassasis Dakkstromri
Bull and Vitleysa
263
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 03:52:00 -
[950] - Quote
xXThe EntityXx wrote:I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF.
Good thing I know some people that own tribute and can fly a JF (time to re-buy one!)...
And who said you can't find market intel on the forums?! CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
903
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 04:08:00 -
[951] - Quote
xXThe EntityXx wrote:I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF. Close, but keep trying. There's actually a way in under the 10LY range.
I guess I could TELL you, but what would be the fun in that? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions Stain Confederation
414
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 04:10:00 -
[952] - Quote
Querns wrote:xXThe EntityXx wrote:I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF. Close, but keep trying. There's actually a way in under the 10LY range. I guess I could TELL you, but what would be the fun in that? This is one reason why they should drop it to 8 or 9, then we could see at least some relevance in the geography. |
Steve Korakat
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 04:13:00 -
[953] - Quote
EVE learning curve is difficult already and many players have given up from the beginning.
This patch/nerf is way too confusing. Can we make adjustment in a simple stupid manner?
|
Polo Marco
Four Winds
18
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 04:14:00 -
[954] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Okay, some notes from the thread, probably two posts I have been a big advocate of changes being done in the same manner as focusing a microscope. Coarse focus and then fine and for gods sake stop driving the lens through the slide. The first threadnaught? First twist of thew knob. Nobody expects to hit focus on the first try. So then they listened, looked, thought about it and this thread is the second twist. Look back through it. You are engaged in small arguments but aside from a few trolls there is not a lot of 'oh gods . . . this is the end of it all' Matter of fact a lot of you seem almost happy. wierd. Maybe (just maybe) it is because they did listen and so did we (we being the CSM) and we argued for the key points. Amazingly I was in favour of not hitting the blops as hard and easing off on the Logistics. wow Kinda scary when they listen to you. Now go back to page 40 and Greyscales post. IF (I said if, not when) the expansion turns out to be exploitable to some ridiculous degree then actions will be taken. So even if you are sure it is a mistake . . . and it might be (whatever 'it' is for you) then be patient. No, they are not going to tell you in this thread the entire roadmap, but nice try and no harm in asking. Yes, they probably will have some explanation for the whats and whys, lore wise. Being a filthy RP kinda guy I am looking forward to that. Over all I would say the tone, the mood, of this thread is far far different from the last. Maybe because it is coming into focus? Maybe because everybody burned out on the last one. m
Don't mistake a giant sigh of relief for approval. Whatever the motivation behind it a bad idea is a bad idea and this one is SPECTACULARLY bad. The fact that it will not do what it is intended for and puts a HUGE drag on player fun time has been momentarily forgotten in the relief that we got the people driving this little excursion not to throw the economy under the wheels of the bus.
I appreciate your equanimity, but be careful. If you ride the fence on this one you might better put on a cup :P |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6442
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 04:42:00 -
[955] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Querns wrote:xXThe EntityXx wrote:I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF. Close, but keep trying. There's actually a way in under the 10LY range. I guess I could TELL you, but what would be the fun in that? This is one reason why they should drop it to 8 or 9, then we could see at least some relevance in the geography. Goons cried too much apparently? ^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
260
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 05:00:00 -
[956] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Greyscale, is there any chance you could cap fatigue at a maximum of 300?
This would then give a maximum time possible to completely clear fatigue of 50 hours
And then for all ships you would have a maximum possible jump cooldown of 5 hours
Capping the maximum fatigue at 300 would mean that no one would ever be punished for more than 50 hours, and would still mean jump cooldown is at a prohibitive level when you raise your fatigue too greatly.
Also, I think you need to somehow link the cooldown to the ship as well as the pilot if that is at all possible to prevent multiple pilots being used to transfer capitals easily.
All fatigue timers should relate to the ship not the pilot, making them relate to the pilot is so open to abuse the whole concept is a failure, no-one needs to find exploits, they are built into the mechanic.
Fatigue = Punishment.. I won't pay to play a game to be punished by a game mechanic. I am not breaking any rules, I am not cheating, I have trained to use the ships in a certain way, I have paid to buy those ships. Simply because the original mechanics of the game were flawed is no excuse to punish those who used them. Had you told me a few years ago I was at risk of being punished in the future for training certain ship classes, I would not have wasted the time and money training capital alts. Had you told me jumping a tengu through 2 jump bridges and a titan bridge to get to a fight would mean I could not use easily those "legitimate" game mechanics for the next month because I was being punished by the creators of the game, for playing the game, I would have found another game to play, one that didn't deliberately set out to create game mechanics to punish players who have spent years training to fly the ships they will now be punished for flying.
What I will in future be telling people who ask me about Eve Online. Eve is no longer a sandbox where everyone can choose how they play. It is a game where you play as CCP deem suitable. If you don't want to change your play style and have to adapt every time a dev has an idea, you just can't play eve. - - - - - - - - - For those who are looking for capital alts so you can "adapt", watch the character bazaar, my 6 will all be there soon. My opinions are mine. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK. Just don't bother Hating - I don't care.. |
OldWolf69
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
163
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 05:19:00 -
[957] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Okay, some notes from the thread, probably two posts I have been a big advocate of changes being done in the same manner as focusing a microscope. Coarse focus and then fine and for gods sake stop driving the lens through the slide. The first threadnaught? First twist of thew knob. Nobody expects to hit focus on the first try. So then they listened, looked, thought about it and this thread is the second twist. Look back through it. You are engaged in small arguments but aside from a few trolls there is not a lot of 'oh gods . . . this is the end of it all' Matter of fact a lot of you seem almost happy. wierd. Maybe (just maybe) it is because they did listen and so did we (we being the CSM) and we argued for the key points. Amazingly I was in favour of not hitting the blops as hard and easing off on the Logistics. wow Kinda scary when they listen to you. Now go back to page 40 and Greyscales post. IF (I said if, not when) the expansion turns out to be exploitable to some ridiculous degree then actions will be taken. So even if you are sure it is a mistake . . . and it might be (whatever 'it' is for you) then be patient. No, they are not going to tell you in this thread the entire roadmap, but nice try and no harm in asking. Yes, they probably will have some explanation for the whats and whys, lore wise. Being a filthy RP kinda guy I am looking forward to that. Over all I would say the tone, the mood, of this thread is far far different from the last. Maybe because it is coming into focus? Maybe because everybody burned out on the last one. m Bleah. How stupid do you think we are? Just as stupid CCP insists we must be? |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6442
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 06:07:00 -
[958] - Quote
OldWolf69 wrote:Mike Azariah wrote:Okay, some notes from the thread, probably two posts I have been a big advocate of changes being done in the same manner as focusing a microscope. Coarse focus and then fine and for gods sake stop driving the lens through the slide. The first threadnaught? First twist of thew knob. Nobody expects to hit focus on the first try. So then they listened, looked, thought about it and this thread is the second twist. Look back through it. You are engaged in small arguments but aside from a few trolls there is not a lot of 'oh gods . . . this is the end of it all' Matter of fact a lot of you seem almost happy. wierd. Maybe (just maybe) it is because they did listen and so did we (we being the CSM) and we argued for the key points. Amazingly I was in favour of not hitting the blops as hard and easing off on the Logistics. wow Kinda scary when they listen to you. Now go back to page 40 and Greyscales post. IF (I said if, not when) the expansion turns out to be exploitable to some ridiculous degree then actions will be taken. So even if you are sure it is a mistake . . . and it might be (whatever 'it' is for you) then be patient. No, they are not going to tell you in this thread the entire roadmap, but nice try and no harm in asking. Yes, they probably will have some explanation for the whats and whys, lore wise. Being a filthy RP kinda guy I am looking forward to that. Over all I would say the tone, the mood, of this thread is far far different from the last. Maybe because it is coming into focus? Maybe because everybody burned out on the last one. m Bleah. How stupid do you think we are? Just as stupid CCP insists we must be? If it does not satisfy their vision, perhaps they will have to rebalance your intelligence stats
Maybe with some sort of fatigue mechanism?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers. |
JC Anderson
State Protectorate Caldari State
1165
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 06:22:00 -
[959] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:Querns wrote:xXThe EntityXx wrote:I hope you guys realize that these changes still do not allow the supply of anything to Venal unless you own Tribute, essentially making it SOV space rather than NPC nullsec. The shortest jump available is 10.028 ly, just outside the range of a JF. Close, but keep trying. There's actually a way in under the 10LY range. I guess I could TELL you, but what would be the fun in that? This is one reason why they should drop it to 8 or 9, then we could see at least some relevance in the geography. Goons cried too much apparently?
Grr goons |
MuppetsSlayed
Aegis Cartel The G0dfathers
16
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 06:23:00 -
[960] - Quote
These amendments are defiantly positive and address a lot of the tears.
My concern when this was announced was with moving corps when you live in zero which has still not been addressed.
Currently you pack up your carriers on your combat toons and rorqs on your indy toons and make several jumps back and forth to low sec. You then switch corps, move your jump alts and make several hops back and forward to your new home.
If your going a long way or are deep out into zero you needs some mids. This process has always taken a while but has been something you did youself. Do you expect the corp/group your leaving to help escort you out of their space over and over again to get your stuff out?
Its going to take considerably longer now to move corps, a lot of people might not bother - I cant see how it can be intended for people to be less likely to move corps / areas as this really makes null static / stagnent for a player.
To resolve this issue why dont you make carriers be able to carry more ships at once or allow Rorqs to move more classes of ships? You would then be able to restore the ability to move your ships and aachieve your power projection nerf. |
|
|
|
|
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 .. 78 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |