EVE Search - What 3 things would you change about eve?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

What 3 things would you change about eve?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 78	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:00:40 - [1] - Quote The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above.
Pryce Caesar Cloak and Daggers Fidelas Constans 21	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:42:34 - [2] - Quote You mean to say that, because new elements of gameplay were added to diversify the PvP nature of EVE Online, it has become "risk aversive"? EWAR and Logistics are meant to make the PvP aspect of EVE about more than "lock on, click, blow up target", and add another element of strategy to the game. The point is to out-think and out-plan your enemy. If you are complaining about stuff like EWAR and Logistics, then it seems like the complaint is about not being able to out-think the enemy. They are not "I WIN" buttons if you are a good enough to be able to coordinate your fleets to neutralize them. I will ignore the Neutral repping point, because I am not entirely familiar with it. Point being, you talk about "risk aversion" with EWAR and Logistics, but you also point towards them being "I WIN" buttons which, as I pointed out above, seems to point towards you having been blown out of the sky a number of times by Combat-EWAR/Combat-Logi ship pairs in the past. In other words, you just want your PvP to be "easier", and that seems to be true "risk aversion" - the removal of your target's means to out-match you.
zelalot OMB Corp 5	Posted - 2015.11.26 17:59:25 - [3] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above. Pryce Caesar wrote: You mean to say that, because new elements of gameplay were added to diversify the PvP nature of EVE Online, it has become "risk aversive"? EWAR and Logistics are meant to make the PvP aspect of EVE about more than "lock on, click, blow up target", and add another element of strategy to the game. The point is to out-think and out-plan your enemy. If you are complaining about stuff like EWAR and Logistics, then it seems like the complaint is about not being able to out-think the enemy. They are not "I WIN" buttons if you are a good enough to be able to coordinate your fleets to neutralize them. I will ignore the Neutral repping point, because I am not entirely familiar with it. Point being, you talk about "risk aversion" with EWAR and Logistics, but you also point towards them being "I WIN" buttons which, as I pointed out above, seems to point towards you having been blown out of the sky a number of times by Combat-EWAR/Combat-Logi ship pairs in the past. In other words, you just want your PvP to be "easier", and that seems to be true "risk aversion" - the removal of your target's means to out-match you. I have to agree with the OP. I think there is too much. too many unknowns and therefore people don't want to engage meaning yes risk aversion. I wouldn't call them I win buttons but I would go as far as saying EWAR and logi are fight spoilers with the team that can bring the most EWAR and logi being the out right winners. To me my three things are: 1. Ewar and logi should be reworked. 2. more mission related to actual pvp content 3. somehow get the game to be less risk averse.
Gods Prophet Rockets Uber Alles 23	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:03:41 - [4] - Quote 1. Come up with a new motivation for living and working in Null Sec. "Empire Building" just isn't cutting it anymore. 2. Completely rework the war dec mechanic so Wars are fun for both the decced and the deccer 3. Create a Bounty Hunter system that allows criminals in hi sec to be hunted in a way that is fun for the hunter and the criminal
ll Kuray ll The Scope Gallente Federation 15	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:20:53 - [5] - Quote 1. Improve ways for people to asses the battlefield. I have to agree: 2. EWAR rethink 3. Logi rethink Eve isn't a game of skill anymore and I think this has contributed to the downfall of the game.
HeXxploiT Big Diggers Get Off My Lawn 189	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:37:50 - [6] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse... Perhaps you should stop flying cheap ships and then tell me it's risk averse. I assure you if you're flying in something bigger and more expensive than an atron with T1 rigs you'll find the game a little more interesting. Try fitting up a couple of blingy cruisers or faction battleships, go do some pvp in low or nul and then come back and tell me how risk averse it is. Troll...
Bumblefck Kerensky Initiatives 9306	Posted - 2015.11.26 18:46:33 - [7] - Quote It's called a 'comfort zone' for a reason. Got a HoleySheet1 corpse? I'll buy it for 200m! Bumble's Space Log
Otso Bakarti Filial Pariahs 475	Posted - 2015.11.26 19:06:10 - [8] - Quote I've said this for years, and a thin minority manages to shout it down, though the majority really wants it: 1.) Make piracy a crime against the sovereignty where it occurs. 2.) Make the pirate(s) criminals with that sovereignty in all its systems. 3.) Make the punishment fit the crime; hefty/hurtful fines, banishment from said sovereignty's systems till it's paid. Make the back story, the underlying characters and events MEANINGFUL by bringing them into the IMMERSION in a real and meaningful way. Discourage penny ante fly by night vandals from trashing the game with pedestrian and tawdry antics. Make racial sovereignty REAL. PS "Risk averse" is a slogan invented by the minority PvP-ers hoping it will force management to turn EVE (and other games, as well) into a strictly PvP game, even though these people comprise 20% (or so) of video gamers worldwide (www). When you see "risk averse" in a post, remember it's there to obfuscate and confuse, because the people who use it know they can't win by just being honest with their intentions and ambitions. So, they're resorting to a con job. Paranoia strikes deep....
Yang Aurilen TunDraGon Project.Mayhem. 988	Posted - 2015.11.26 19:34:56 - [9] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above. 1. Whiny people 2. Whiny people who refuse to GIT GUD 3. Whiny people who can't think their way out of a problem even if the solution is in their hands with instruction sheets on how to use the said solution Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
iforumizer Hamabu Hedion University Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.11.26 19:48:53 - [10] - Quote 1. undocking at 15km. 2. Cleaner UI. EVE is pretty, but the action is often burried behind too many windows 3. WIS

Paranoid Loyd 7551	Posted - 2015.11.26 20:00:37 - [11] - Quote 1) People who make new threads when all it is the same thing the last thread they opened said but slightly different. 2) People who use the term risk averse and then post with an alt they don't use in game. 3) People who whine about the things they should be figuring out how to use to their advantage instead of whining about them. "Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata Fix the Prospect!
mojogore Deep Structure. The Bastion 0	Posted - 2015.11.26 20:13:01 - [12] - Quote 1) Add split screen for 2 accounts 2) redo battleships 3) Walking in station gambling casino, strip bar, ship spinner speed control.
ll Kuray ll The Scope Gallente Federation 15	Posted - 2015.11.27 02:07:57 - [13] - Quote HeXxploiT, Yang Aurilen, Paranoid Loyd You three have to be forum trolls really... no idea why you waste time writing criticism. Game must be fine - i mean it's one of the lowest active users this evening... yeah thats right game is doing just fine.
Paul Pohl blue media poetry 32	Posted - 2015.11.27 02:38:01 - [14] - Quote 1) bounty system 2) salvage drones not stacking things neatly in the hold 3) the idea that mining is not free
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 40935	Posted - 2015.11.27 03:10:10 - [15] - Quote 1. Sibyyl is in the wrong Corp. I would move her to The Vendunari 2. LAGL thread was overheating the servers so was closed. Reopen the old one 3. I am a scrub at pvp. Make pvp easier for scrubs like me Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Neph Operation Meatshield Plexodus 216	Posted - 2015.11.27 03:18:18 - [16] - Quote 1) Make battleships fearsome 2) Split the screen, let me have my tactical, useful, info-full screen and then a pretty view of my ship while I die horribly. The immersion of zooming in makes fighting a lot more personal and fun, but obviously you die if you're not zoomed out with velocity stats filling the screen 3) Let me wear Jin-Mei clothes when I'm character customizing in a Jin-Mei station! Our peoples have stared extinction in the eye; but we have spat in that eye and stood to fight with valor and undying loyalty to our culture and our kin. Our struggle is as one, so let us struggle together.
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1681	Posted - 2015.11.27 04:11:15 - [17] - Quote 1 Remove lvl 4 and incursions from high sec 2 diminish jump drive/bridge capabilities even further 3 remove off grid boosting
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 40937	Posted - 2015.11.27 04:25:52 - [18] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: 3 remove off grid boosting http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3ue8fe/off_grid_links_removal_confirmed/ Might still be a bit off as development is concentrating on Citadels and Capitals, but it's coming. As someone that trained up a max boosting alt, I can't wait for the change. Adapting to a new approach will be fun. I was hoping for a change a bit more creative than just on grid with AOE, but whatever CCP does will be fine. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Bruce Kemp Suddenly taken over FETID 137	Posted - 2015.11.27 05:20:16 - [19] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. Logi is not OP i have solo engaged a oneros and a gila (in my gila) killed te logi and then killed the gila... -áIf people played EVE as much as they posted rubbish on these forums, they might enjoy the game.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 40937	Posted - 2015.11.27 05:24:33 - [20] - Quote Bruce Kemp wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. Logi is not OP i have solo engaged a oneros and a gila (in my gila) killed te logi and then killed the gila... Yeah no one really complains about it at the small gang level. It's more an issue at the block level fleet engagements where the decision about fight or flight comes down to whether there is enough DPS to punch through the opposition logistic reps or not. The side with the best logistics has the upper hand. Some the upcoming changes will hopefully rebalance the nullsec logistics without changing small gang use too much. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari

Jenn aSide Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore 13027	Posted - 2015.11.27 05:42:28 - [21] - Quote I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 760	Posted - 2015.11.27 05:47:21 - [22] - Quote 1. Missiles and guns. Long post, but here was my proposal: Weapon Tiericide V2 2. Damage stacking, to work along side part one. Also posted, but way back in ye old forums: Dymamic fleet pvp Jenn aSide wrote: I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available. 3. Fix logistics N+1. No post for this because is more recent idea. Take the range bonus off logistic T2 as well as the fitting reduction bonus for the Logi cruisers. This makes logi cruisers medium reps for both. In it's place, they can fit a subcap style logistics module similar to bastion. Enable it, and get the fun RR range and other bonuses for the T2 variants. So massive active tank and the range plus rep bonuses, but unable to take reps. They are still effective in the spider tank, but then without the incredible range, thus limiting N+1. Active tank means they can function like a triage carrier, take some pounding without the reps, but a limit to it. Suddenly a fleet has some issues, dps, or logi. Logi are high tank, so spend time taking them out, or try to blast way past other ships. Too many logi, and not enough to stop enemy damage. Slow death as logi taken out, then back to the damage dealers. On top of that, new battleships would be required. T1 logistics battleship following the guide for the T1 frig and cruiser. T2 battleship would be a logistics command ship to fill the gap between cruiser and capital. Following same guide, this still will limit the N+1. With ongrid boosting coming, it also means a heavier command ship as well to fit between the battlecruisers, and the capitals. B-B-B-Bonus Round! I made this years ago for the ship design contest. People still ask, and I still want one. With sov space gaining benefits to self reliance, these could be quite useful. It was a lot of work, so not going to let it just fade away! Please CCP??? To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Kaely Tanniss Black Hydra Consortium. 530	Posted - 2015.11.27 07:05:50 - [23] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above. 1: Ewar is an essential part of PvP..you either use it or you don't. It is NOT a guaranteed win and skills and strategy can circumvent it. I admit, it sucks to be on the recieving end of it..but it's very nice to dish it. It's a matter of planning, cooperation, and fleet strategy to both implement and counter ewar. Ewar can be countered with eccm, training the proper sensor skills, and ewar of your own. Make use of it in any way you can. 2: Logi is another aspect of PvP that is there to make fights last. Logi is essential as well. It saves the game from being boring and a matter of who fits more armor deciding the winner. In order to utilize logi to its potential, you need fleet cooperation and planning. To me it sounds as if you have had trouble organizing proper logi for your fleets or have been "out logi'ed" in fleets. This can be an issue I admit, but that's why Eve is a social game. Some battles you cannot win alone..and logi doesn't determine the winner either..they are extremely vulverable and weak..especially to ewar. Use them both to maximize your advantage. 3: Neutral logi..now this one is touchy. Neutral logi is what sepparates hs warefare from null and low. In null and low..anyone in local who isn't blue is an enemy. In hs, you don't know who the enemy is. Sure, the wts flash..but their scouts, logi, and links don't. This adds a whole new level to fighting. You have to weigh your chances and choose your fights wisely rather than dropping in on a target and being an f1 monkey. Also, neutral logi is not invulnerable. Once they rep, they go suspect making them a target not only for the wts..but everyone in system. This is a chance a neutral logi pilot must accept and take. To assume a neutral logi is somehow untouchable is incorrect..in fact, they are more vulnerable than a logi that is in the wt corp. There's my 2 cents ll Kuray ll wrote: HeXxploiT, Yang Aurilen, Paranoid Loyd You three have to be forum trolls really... no idea why you waste time writing criticism. Game must be fine - i mean it's one of the lowest active users this evening... yeah thats right game is doing just fine. That's because today is a major US holiday..just fyi If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
Johan Civire Caldari Provisions Caldari State 1029	Posted - 2015.11.27 07:19:12 - [24] - Quote - No chat/only invite to local. - I can walk where i want - No high sec. But with concord all around space. If you **** some one and some one see it you get your balls burn but if not your kill is golden
Tiddle Jr Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 653	Posted - 2015.11.27 08:46:05 - [25] - Quote 1. Make Uedama new Mega trading hub. 2. Remove T1 logi cruisers. 3. After pilot been podded make it 12 hrs freeze period for any activity. So basically re-podding would actually became time consume factor. No SP's are trained during this 12 hrs.
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1681	Posted - 2015.11.27 09:35:23 - [26] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available. There's a very easy solution to this which will also have a massive impact on current doctrines etc (which is good). A logi doesn't actually repair but by activating his module on another ship it augments that ship's own repper where it reps a whole lot more. First of all it doesn't help if you stack it because only the single biggest bonus from any activated module applies. It also removes the lol EHP fits and you'll actually have to choose: run EHP fleet or have logis which also require the rest of your pilots to adapt and pay attention.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 760	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:21:41 - [27] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available. There's a very easy solution to this which will also have a massive impact on current doctrines etc (which is good). A logi doesn't actually repair but by activating his module on another ship it augments that ship's own repper where it reps a whole lot more. First of all it doesn't help if you stack it because only the single biggest bonus from any activated module applies. It also removes the lol EHP fits and you'll actually have to choose: run EHP fleet or have logis which also require the rest of your pilots to adapt and pay attention. Wow! Intruiging concept. Definitely worth possibly more discussion. I can think some bits that kinda would take away from active logi, most notably would be tag along logi alts. Would detract from a playstyle that otherwise favors the soloplay To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
TigerXtrm KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1318	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:26:23 - [28] - Quote Something something something wardecs. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
Jon Essler Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:29:06 - [29] - Quote 1) Delete the Goons 2) Introduce a new playable race: the Nai T'Elph 3) Selfie cam for CQ.
Valacus Streets of Fire 54	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:37:07 - [30] - Quote 1) Remove off grid boosting. They put command ships in the game with massive tanks, then allow us to use them off grid, so everyone uses them off grid. Every fleet has to have one, but no fleet has to risk one. What is so wrong with requiring people to put their boosters on the field? 2) Rebalance ECM. I think the mechanic itself needs to change, not just tinkering with the RNG. Being unable to lock anything is just way more potent than any other form of EWAR. 3) Find a solution for AFK cloaking.

Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2411	Posted - 2015.11.27 19:43:59 - [31] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available. There's a very easy solution to this which will also have a massive impact on current doctrines etc (which is good). A logi doesn't actually repair but by activating his module on another ship it augments that ship's own repper where it reps a whole lot more. First of all it doesn't help if you stack it because only the single biggest bonus from any activated module applies. It also removes the lol EHP fits and you'll actually have to choose: run EHP fleet or have logis which also require the rest of your pilots to adapt and pay attention. Can't wait for fights to be decided by the amount of cap booster your ship can carry so you can keep the local repper going...
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4205	Posted - 2015.11.27 20:21:46 - [32] - Quote Three things? 1- There is no way in which PvE players can generate content, becoming enablers or instigators, through means of PvE. That is killing EVE so it would be nice to change it. 2- Stop adding content that can only be used and exploited by PvP veterans with experience and friends. Add content that can be learned, enjoyed and mastered from scratch, on your own, and even without firing a single shot. Refer to point 1. 3- Expand EVE gameplay so it is about much more than spaceships and pew pew. Add avatar gameplay and NPC interaction in stations and on planets, develop means to political intrigue, economic warfare and other non-military conflict. Refer to points 1 and 2. For what is worth... CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1683	Posted - 2015.11.27 22:18:54 - [33] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Gregor Parud wrote: Jenn aSide wrote: I've always thought the way logi works is over the top. I think reps from logi should stack with other logi. The problem with that is that people will just math their way to bigger fleets that can alpha through the maximum amount of repping available. There's a very easy solution to this which will also have a massive impact on current doctrines etc (which is good). A logi doesn't actually repair but by activating his module on another ship it augments that ship's own repper where it reps a whole lot more. First of all it doesn't help if you stack it because only the single biggest bonus from any activated module applies. It also removes the lol EHP fits and you'll actually have to choose: run EHP fleet or have logis which also require the rest of your pilots to adapt and pay attention. Can't wait for fights to be decided by the amount of cap booster your ship can carry so you can keep the local repper going... It diminishes the super focussed silly builds (which tend to cause trouble), on top of that it requires more input/piloting from the "grunt" in the fleet making it all more piloting skill based rather than have a fleet of cattle controlled and kept running through a few good players/logis.. It also forces more communication/interaction between the logi and its target so it gets more and more difficult to achieve in larger fleets. There's a whole lot of pros and cons going back and forth, with a lot if implications and it's also going to have an impact on the N+1 tactic (initially it seems as if it would benefit it but in the end I don't think it would). It's something I literally "just thought of" (haven't seen or read anything on that elsewhere, if so please point me to it) but the more I think about it the more it seems to make sense.
Ralph King-Griffin Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance 12880	Posted - 2015.11.27 22:25:31 - [34] - Quote take dinsdales ball gag out Ball gag cam (with the same one) remote locator agents Better the Devil you know. =]\|[=
Gillia Winddancer Aliastra Gallente Federation 457	Posted - 2015.11.27 22:32:27 - [35] - Quote Otso Bakarti wrote: I've said this for years, and a thin minority manages to shout it down, though the majority really wants it: 1.) Make piracy a crime against the sovereignty where it occurs. 2.) Make the pirate(s) criminals with that sovereignty in all its systems. 3.) Make the punishment fit the crime; hefty/hurtful fines, banishment from said sovereignty's systems till it's paid. Make the back story, the underlying characters and events MEANINGFUL by bringing them into the IMMERSION in a real and meaningful way. Discourage penny ante fly by night vandals from trashing the game with pedestrian and tawdry antics. Make racial sovereignty REAL. PS "Risk averse" is a slogan invented by the minority PvP-ers hoping it will force management to turn EVE (and other games, as well) into a strictly PvP game, even though these people comprise 20% (or so) of video gamers worldwide (www). When you see "risk averse" in a post, remember it's there to obfuscate and confuse, because the people who use it know they can't win by just being honest with their intentions and ambitions. So, they're resorting to a con job. Am all for this but at the same time then pirates need more freedom aka no concord. The way in which the space police interacts with criminals needs a total makeover in general. EVE already has almost all of the necessary puzzle pieces for this luckily. The insta-gibbing should just disappear and instead be replaced with relentless chasing by really tough, non-loot ships (all depending on sec status all the way to 0.1 systems) Basically 1.0 systems would be like having SWAT and FBI after your ass whilst in a 0.1 system you might occasionally run into a lone patrol ship piloted by a doughnut-loving freak.
Daerrol Death By Design Did he say Jump 268	Posted - 2015.11.27 22:43:50 - [36] - Quote WARNING! Troll response to a trol lthread incomming. WARNING! Optopmistic/fantasy thread title leads to whining thread (Clickbait) Neutral Alt complaining of risk averse gameplay. (Post with your main) Character with no kills or losses to speak of talking about PVP (Lack credibility) Vague unsupported claims Secret "Highsec wars suck" gasp BINGO!
Gregor Parud Ordo Ardish 1683	Posted - 2015.11.28 00:48:20 - [37] - Quote Ralph King-Griffin wrote: remote locator agents You evil evil man, no more alt switching to get your 5th locator on the job (and then have to log back to the others to get the result).
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15261	Posted - 2015.11.28 01:00:17 - [38] - Quote I only really have one that relates to game balance. Logi should not be infinitely sustainable. As a force multiplier, the output of 1 logi player significantly exceeds the dps of one attack ship player. Worse, unlike weapons in the game, logi has no reload timer and functionally never runs out of cap thanks to cap transfer mods. This creates a situation whereby it is unviable to "go down fighting" by trying to inflict casualties on the opposing force if your own is insufficient to win the fight. This is because unless you have the critical mass required to break the enemy reps, you can inflict basically zero lasting damage. Since your only options then become "whelp" or "don't fight", the vast majority of people will avoid any fight in which they don't stand to win automatically. The problem, then, is that logi is both infinitely scalable and infinitely sustainable. I do not wish to attack their scalability, because ******** ideas that stem from "I H8 N+1" always leads to breaking the game worse, like we recently have with speed creep and kiting. Instead, their sustainability should be addressed, in order to make logi something that is a clutch tool, but not something you can literally just rep something all day long with. My solution? Remote logi should require "ammo" of some kind, and innately generate heat when cycling on player ships(this so we don't wreck structure repping as a concept). This forces the logi player to have some resource management element in their gameplay. You can pour on rep after rep in an emergency, but if you do you will have to cool down eventually, or you can be more judicious with your reps. This has the side effect of also improving the viability of local reps. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 760	Posted - 2015.11.28 01:02:31 - [39] - Quote Gillia Winddancer wrote: Otso Bakarti wrote: I've said this for years, and a thin minority manages to shout it down, though the majority really wants it: 1.) Make piracy a crime against the sovereignty where it occurs. 2.) Make the pirate(s) criminals with that sovereignty in all its systems. 3.) Make the punishment fit the crime; hefty/hurtful fines, banishment from said sovereignty's systems till it's paid. Make the back story, the underlying characters and events MEANINGFUL by bringing them into the IMMERSION in a real and meaningful way. Discourage penny ante fly by night vandals from trashing the game with pedestrian and tawdry antics. Make racial sovereignty REAL. PS "Risk averse" is a slogan invented by the minority PvP-ers hoping it will force management to turn EVE (and other games, as well) into a strictly PvP game, even though these people comprise 20% (or so) of video gamers worldwide (www). When you see "risk averse" in a post, remember it's there to obfuscate and confuse, because the people who use it know they can't win by just being honest with their intentions and ambitions. So, they're resorting to a con job. Am all for this but at the same time then pirates need more freedom aka no concord. The way in which the space police interacts with criminals needs a total makeover in general. EVE already has almost all of the necessary puzzle pieces for this luckily. The insta-gibbing should just disappear and instead be replaced with relentless chasing by really tough, non-loot ships (all depending on sec status all the way to 0.1 systems) Basically 1.0 systems would be like having SWAT and FBI after your ass whilst in a 0.1 system you might occasionally run into a lone patrol ship piloted by a doughnut-loving freak. Double quotes for agreement on both sides. Harsher consequences, but being pirate needs to open doors on the pirate side. Have hidden gates or cynos ran by npcs so pirates can use or other forms of security bypass. Add incentives and rewards for being a pirate hunter and we start getting into pirate vs npc warfare. To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Paul Pohl blue media poetry 32	Posted - 2015.11.28 01:49:02 - [40] - Quote Gillia Winddancer wrote: Otso Bakarti wrote: I've said this for years, and a thin minority manages to shout it down, though the majority really wants it: 1.) Make piracy a crime against the sovereignty where it occurs. 2.) Make the pirate(s) criminals with that sovereignty in all its systems. 3.) Make the punishment fit the crime; hefty/hurtful fines, banishment from said sovereignty's systems till it's paid. Make the back story, the underlying characters and events MEANINGFUL by bringing them into the IMMERSION in a real and meaningful way. Discourage penny ante fly by night vandals from trashing the game with pedestrian and tawdry antics. Make racial sovereignty REAL. PS "Risk averse" is a slogan invented by the minority PvP-ers hoping it will force management to turn EVE (and other games, as well) into a strictly PvP game, even though these people comprise 20% (or so) of video gamers worldwide (www). When you see "risk averse" in a post, remember it's there to obfuscate and confuse, because the people who use it know they can't win by just being honest with their intentions and ambitions. So, they're resorting to a con job. Am all for this but at the same time then pirates need more freedom aka no concord. The way in which the space police interacts with criminals needs a total makeover in general. EVE already has almost all of the necessary puzzle pieces for this luckily. The insta-gibbing should just disappear and instead be replaced with relentless chasing by really tough, non-loot ships (all depending on sec status all the way to 0.1 systems) Basically 1.0 systems would be like having SWAT and FBI after your ass whilst in a 0.1 system you might occasionally run into a lone patrol ship piloted by a doughnut-loving freak. or you could allow pirates to use hideaways/dens etc as alternative bases and couple this with with sov and security status changes suddenly you have a dynamic system in which pirates can flourish - or perish

Laken Starr Mining and Munitions Ltd SpaceMonkey's Alliance 86	Posted - 2015.11.28 15:21:05 - [41] - Quote 1. WiS - Polish, expand, integrate. WiS has the potential to add so much to the game, but it's being completely ignored at the moment. 2. On-grid boosting - This is apparently coming, so huzzah. This should have been done a long time ago, but better late than never. 3. Manufacturing revamp - I've never particularly liked the BPO/BPC system. I want manufacturing to be about what my character knows, not what my character owns.
Val'Dore PlanetCorp InterStellar 1134	Posted - 2015.11.28 15:45:56 - [42] - Quote I'd remove any ship that requires adv spaceship command and everything associated with them I'd implement my Star Jump Drive idea I'd change sovereignty back to a modified version of my Sovereignty 2.0 plan, this time centered on Citadels. Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy. I invented Tiericide
Alea Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 131	Posted - 2015.11.28 16:48:33 - [43] - Quote So us older players with crappy eyesight could actually play the game again make the tiny, too numerous space icons an option from the old space icons we had in the past, allot of us old bastards really do miss playing this game. Kill fozziesov with extreme prejudice, in real life when we go to war we shoot at sh1t for crying out loud. Make caps useful again and drastically reduce jump fatigue so I can use my space suitcase to move crap like I so easily could in the past.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 776	Posted - 2015.11.28 17:33:00 - [44] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: My solution? Remote logi should require "ammo" of some kind, and innately generate heat when cycling on player ships(this so we don't wreck structure repping as a concept). This forces the logi player to have some resource management element in their gameplay. You can pour on rep after rep in an emergency, but if you do you will have to cool down eventually, or you can be more judicious with your reps. This has the side effect of also improving the viability of local reps. Hrm.... The one issue with that, not a bad issue but still an issue is that while management of resources and heat would make for a more involved put more skill on the logi, I don't think it will end the N+1. It would probably end up (N+1)*2. If I was an FC, logistics doctrine would probably split into teams where the logi FC would split them into two team, Run them with a timer to switch teams to cover cool down. If ammo was excessively oversized, or more likely cap boosters, it is a potential in a longer fight but even then, not a difficult strategy to work. Either way, anything that promotes more active play on the side of the player is a win if it is a skill and not just a minigame. On the good news, we know CCP is aware and concerned about N+1 play. We have new logi ships coming, but they also are working with RR mechanics. During the CCP honorable duels the other day, they were discussing that other stuff is being pondered. The most notable is the stuff they said when they introduced the concept of logi capitals which would need to really run in a triage mode to give reps. This means that the logis themselves become vulnerable at least. Problem then is that most combat larger scale will consist of shoot logi only. :-( To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Demerius Xenocratus Rapid Withdrawal 759	Posted - 2015.11.28 17:39:31 - [45] - Quote Yang Aurilen wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above. 1. Whiny people 2. Whiny people who refuse to GIT GUD 3. Whiny people who can't think their way out of a problem even if the solution is in their hands with instruction sheets on how to use the said solution Just to clarify, does "GIT GUD" equal "buy more alts" or are we actually talking about ingame decisions and skills of specific players here? I must admit I generally find some confusion surrounding this topic because I've never understood what paying CCP more $/month has to do with skill.
FT Cold The Scope Gallente Federation 33	Posted - 2015.11.29 03:54:32 - [46] - Quote 1. Rebalance ECM, including cap warfare. The only way to completely take someone out of the fight should be to destroy their ship. ECM doesn't really have a meaningful counter-play. ECCM is ineffective and even if it were, no module should completely prevent your ship from being able to lock at least one other, even if it's chance based. Neuts are in a similar state. Cap boosters aren't really an effective defense, as they don't provide enough cap to offset the strength of neuts and cap batteries are next to worthless. For cap based tanks, which aren't very strong to begin with without links, any ship with enough neuting power is a hard counter, and bonused hulls spell instant death. Utility highs should be made into a slot which players need to make a choice, and for offensive options, there needs to be an effective defense. 2. Battleship PVP performance needs to be decoupled from neuts, drones, and RHMLs. Part of the problem is power-creep from smaller hulls, which isn't really an issue of buffing battleships. T3 cruisers (and destroyers) are long overdue for another nerf to EHP, and a fresh one to DPS and application. That said, battleships could sorely stand to see a balance pass, and I think that a round of buffs similar to those that CBCs enjoyed to mobility, EHP, and cap, wouldn't be game breaking, especially with links going on grid in the future. Instead of a role bonus to range, a bonus to scan resolution, sensor strength or warp speed would be welcome; a 2.4 au/sec warp speed would be reasonable to offset with a few rigs. 3. More support, ships, modules, and mechanics designed for solo PVP. Solo PVP is the lifeblood of EVE, it's far from dead, even if it isn't as visible as the big fleet battles featured in the trailers. It's accessable, high risk-high reward, and generates content. I'm a bit apprehensive about the direction that a few of the latest changes could take. 36k+ scrams from HICs, command destroyers, and on grid only links have the potential to buff low skill, low risk, blobby gameplay while functionally adding much less to small scale gameplay. A bigger, more well organized group deserves to have some advantages, but stack the deck in their favor too much, and the game will lose something special; the ability for a player to jump in a ship and get content anytime is vital to the game's health.
Nat Silverguard Aideron Robotics 208	Posted - 2015.11.29 04:57:21 - [47] - Quote 1. improve ewar's ship overall capabilities (at least tanking) to increase it's demand and become a necessity in fleets just like logi 2. on grid boosting 3. neutrals to gain "suspect" flag when entering FW plexes Just Add Water
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 15286	Posted - 2015.11.29 05:12:39 - [48] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: Hrm.... The one issue with that, not a bad issue but still an issue is that while management of resources and heat would make for a more involved put more skill on the logi, I don't think it will end the N+1. It is absolutely not intended to. Numbers are, in my opinion anyway, by far the most fair force multiplier available. Since this is a flight sim, individual skill will never be a serious factor, which only really leaves us with numbers and pricetag as available options for primary force multipliers in the game. And we all know that pricetag is absolutely unacceptable. Thus, I accept that numbers are and will remain a primary force multiplier. The onus is on game design to create an interesting environment within the framework we have. But trying to rail against numbers as a force multiplier, trying to attack it or deny the reality of the game is just folly. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Demerius Xenocratus Rapid Withdrawal 762	Posted - 2015.11.30 11:19:50 - [49] - Quote FT Cold wrote: 1. Rebalance ECM, including cap warfare. The only way to completely take someone out of the fight should be to destroy their ship. ECM doesn't really have a meaningful counter-play. ECCM is ineffective and even if it were, no module should completely prevent your ship from being able to lock at least one other, even if it's chance based. Neuts are in a similar state. Cap boosters aren't really an effective defense, as they don't provide enough cap to offset the strength of neuts and cap batteries are next to worthless. For cap based tanks, which aren't very strong to begin with without links, any ship with enough neuting power is a hard counter, and bonused hulls spell instant death. Utility highs should be made into a slot which players need to make a choice, and for offensive options, there needs to be an effective defense. 2. Battleship PVP performance needs to be decoupled from neuts, drones, and RHMLs. Part of the problem is power-creep from smaller hulls, which isn't really an issue of buffing battleships. T3 cruisers (and destroyers) are long overdue for another nerf to EHP, and a fresh one to DPS and application. That said, battleships could sorely stand to see a balance pass, and I think that a round of buffs similar to those that CBCs enjoyed to mobility, EHP, and cap, wouldn't be game breaking, especially with links going on grid in the future. Instead of a role bonus to range, a bonus to scan resolution, sensor strength or warp speed would be welcome; a 2.4 au/sec warp speed would be reasonable to offset with a few rigs. 3. More support, ships, modules, and mechanics designed for solo PVP. Solo PVP is the lifeblood of EVE, it's far from dead, even if it isn't as visible as the big fleet battles featured in the trailers. It's accessable, high risk-high reward, and generates content. I'm a bit apprehensive about the direction that a few of the latest changes could take. 36k+ scrams from HICs, command destroyers, and on grid only links have the potential to buff low skill, low risk, blobby gameplay while functionally adding much less to small scale gameplay. A bigger, more well organized group deserves to have some advantages, but stack the deck in their favor too much, and the game will lose something special; the ability for a player to jump in a ship and get content anytime is vital to the game's health. Capless guns and tank available through quite a few fits are a pretty effective counter to neuts. Neuts aren't broken in the way ECM is. I worry about the 36k scram. Instalock gate camps with domination scram-fit HICs are going to suck.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 78	Posted - 2015.11.30 12:39:19 - [50] - Quote Thanks for posts pretty good ideas so far. I was having a think over the weekend and was thinking to myself how easy it is for Frigates to stop a big ship like a BS from entering warp. It feels wrong somehow that.

Malbona Pomon Petulant Luddite GmbH 7	Posted - 2015.11.30 19:05:24 - [51] - Quote 1. FW pilots in hostile empire space should be RED, as should low empire standings pilots (if the local crap security people can shoot you, so should other people). 2. Bounty / Kill Right Marketplace. 3. Better UI display so we can de-clutter that beautiful view.
FT Cold The Scope Gallente Federation 34	Posted - 2015.11.30 20:40:57 - [52] - Quote Demerius Xenocratus wrote: FT Cold wrote: 1. Rebalance ECM, including cap warfare. The only way to completely take someone out of the fight should be to destroy their ship. ECM doesn't really have a meaningful counter-play. ECCM is ineffective and even if it were, no module should completely prevent your ship from being able to lock at least one other, even if it's chance based. Neuts are in a similar state. Cap boosters aren't really an effective defense, as they don't provide enough cap to offset the strength of neuts and cap batteries are next to worthless. For cap based tanks, which aren't very strong to begin with without links, any ship with enough neuting power is a hard counter, and bonused hulls spell instant death. Utility highs should be made into a slot which players need to make a choice, and for offensive options, there needs to be an effective defense. 2. Battleship PVP performance needs to be decoupled from neuts, drones, and RHMLs. Part of the problem is power-creep from smaller hulls, which isn't really an issue of buffing battleships. T3 cruisers (and destroyers) are long overdue for another nerf to EHP, and a fresh one to DPS and application. That said, battleships could sorely stand to see a balance pass, and I think that a round of buffs similar to those that CBCs enjoyed to mobility, EHP, and cap, wouldn't be game breaking, especially with links going on grid in the future. Instead of a role bonus to range, a bonus to scan resolution, sensor strength or warp speed would be welcome; a 2.4 au/sec warp speed would be reasonable to offset with a few rigs. 3. More support, ships, modules, and mechanics designed for solo PVP. Solo PVP is the lifeblood of EVE, it's far from dead, even if it isn't as visible as the big fleet battles featured in the trailers. It's accessable, high risk-high reward, and generates content. I'm a bit apprehensive about the direction that a few of the latest changes could take. 36k+ scrams from HICs, command destroyers, and on grid only links have the potential to buff low skill, low risk, blobby gameplay while functionally adding much less to small scale gameplay. A bigger, more well organized group deserves to have some advantages, but stack the deck in their favor too much, and the game will lose something special; the ability for a player to jump in a ship and get content anytime is vital to the game's health. Capless guns and tank available through quite a few fits are a pretty effective counter to neuts. Neuts aren't broken in the way ECM is. I worry about the 36k scram. Instalock gate camps with domination scram-fit HICs are going to suck. No, neuts aren't broken in the same way that ECM is. I'm not trying to argue that aren't some ways of countering neuts, only that neuts are too strong, hard counter too many fits, don't have good highslot alternatives, and don't have enough effective counters. There's basically no reason not to fit them if you can. I'm not interested in a flame war so I'll leave it at that.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 783	Posted - 2015.11.30 20:53:52 - [53] - Quote FT Cold wrote: 1. Rebalance ECM, including cap warfare. The only way to completely take someone out of the fight should be to destroy their ship. ECM doesn't really have a meaningful counter-play. ECCM is ineffective and even if it were, no module should completely prevent your ship from being able to lock at least one other, even if it's chance based. Hrm, I just had an idea on that. One thing I wish to push for is more value on applied damage. One of these concepts is making use of signature resolution. Perhaps a solution to this would be to remove the chance based permajam, and make it heavily effect a ships target resolution of it's turrets. This effectively makes for less good hits, as well as more misses without the dull cycle jammy. I must post this in features and idea! To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Valacus Streets of Fire 59	Posted - 2015.11.30 21:29:59 - [54] - Quote FT Cold wrote: 1. Rebalance ECM, including cap warfare. The only way to completely take someone out of the fight should be to destroy their ship. ECM doesn't really have a meaningful counter-play. ECCM is ineffective and even if it were, no module should completely prevent your ship from being able to lock at least one other, even if it's chance based. Neuts are in a similar state. Cap boosters aren't really an effective defense, as they don't provide enough cap to offset the strength of neuts and cap batteries are next to worthless. For cap based tanks, which aren't very strong to begin with without links, any ship with enough neuting power is a hard counter, and bonused hulls spell instant death. Utility highs should be made into a slot which players need to make a choice, and for offensive options, there needs to be an effective defense. 2. Battleship PVP performance needs to be decoupled from neuts, drones, and RHMLs. Part of the problem is power-creep from smaller hulls, which isn't really an issue of buffing battleships. T3 cruisers (and destroyers) are long overdue for another nerf to EHP, and a fresh one to DPS and application. That said, battleships could sorely stand to see a balance pass, and I think that a round of buffs similar to those that CBCs enjoyed to mobility, EHP, and cap, wouldn't be game breaking, especially with links going on grid in the future. Instead of a role bonus to range, a bonus to scan resolution, sensor strength or warp speed would be welcome; a 2.4 au/sec warp speed would be reasonable to offset with a few rigs. 3. More support, ships, modules, and mechanics designed for solo PVP. Solo PVP is the lifeblood of EVE, it's far from dead, even if it isn't as visible as the big fleet battles featured in the trailers. It's accessable, high risk-high reward, and generates content. I'm a bit apprehensive about the direction that a few of the latest changes could take. 36k+ scrams from HICs, command destroyers, and on grid only links have the potential to buff low skill, low risk, blobby gameplay while functionally adding much less to small scale gameplay. A bigger, more well organized group deserves to have some advantages, but stack the deck in their favor too much, and the game will lose something special; the ability for a player to jump in a ship and get content anytime is vital to the game's health. Add the removal of off grid boosting and this would be my wet dream patch. Yes, there needs to be more solo oriented modules. Right now soloing is just based on ancil reps, with a few cancer EWAR fits here and there. Soloing by "who can tank the best" is really boring. ECM has always been a really stupid mechanic. "Hahaha, you can no longer play the game except to die!" Who thought up that idea? Every other form of EWAR requires a situational mechanic to be made effective, like transversal for tracking disruptors or range for sensor damps. Jamming simply requires the jam to land. Not to mention ECCM is a wasted module slot if you don't run into jammers, but sensor boosters and tracking computers are never wasted. Battleships suck balls right now. Too big, too slow, too easy to negate DPS, and too easily countered by simple things like neuts. The one and only exception is the one battleship that is relatively small, relatively fast, has a warp speed AND acceleration bonus, uses capless weapons, and uses a weapon type that can be extremely effective at distances where tracking isn't as big of an issue. 3 guesses which one that is.
Ginnie School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 2	Posted - 2015.11.30 22:38:10 - [55] - Quote I like PVE not PVP, don't hate, its just what I find fun. 1) LP - faction level instead of an individual corp level. 2) Salvage Drones - each target a different wreck. 3) New Players - need to have much better tutorials. Lots of questions in SAK about how to access inventory, use blueprints, train skills, etc., etc. Career Level 1 agents dont really provide a tutorial for how to use a blueprint, for example.
Paladin Genghis Khanid Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 14	Posted - 2015.12.01 03:01:24 - [56] - Quote Reinventing ECM: ECM should reduce the number of max targets vs. completely shutting down targeting (although if max targets are low it could still have that affect). When it lands the priority of what targets are lost at the time of jamming is based on sig radius or proximity. Perhaps there could be scripts to shift between making target loss priority be smaller sigs vs. larger sigs. One makes it where the sensors strength isn't enough to track smaller ships and the other limits the system buffer so that it has a hard time holding the info on larger ships. This could also be applied to closer ships vs. farther ships if that route was taken instead. With this mechanic smaller ships would be less effective vs. larger ships with more max targets. Larger ships ECM would be more effective against smaller ships when it lands. Due to this mechanic there would have to be specific ECM modules for different hull sizes. OR ECCM (within the current ECM mechanics): Another concept is that ECCM reduce the effectiveness of ECM, lowering the time the effects of jamming last. So if jam cycle was 20s, an ECCM with 50% resist would reduce that jammed time to 10s. The aggressor would then have to wait out the remaining 10s before the next cycle could land. When resisted all jams are ended. So if you're being jammed by 3 ships they all are resisted no matter where they are in their cycle when 1 of the jams has reaching its time limit. If Ship One's jam is currently at 2s and Ship Two's at 6s, once Ship Three hits 10s the target ship gains immunity. Ship 1 loses 18s of jam time. Ship 2 loses 14s of jam time. Ship 3 loses 10s of jam time. During this immunity no jams can be landed. So if you apply jams during the immunity it is an automatic fail. This will give a quantifiable bonus to ECCM and make the fitting of ECCM quantifiably worthwhile. ECM pilots will also have to manage their ECM to ensure they don't waste cap on pointless cycles. Having more than one jam will still give you better odds of landing jams, but there would be no more ECM stacking. So for all intents and purposes only 1 ECM module on 1 ship can jam a given target at one time.
Paladin Genghis Khanid Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 14	Posted - 2015.12.01 03:11:59 - [57] - Quote Ginnie wrote: 2) Salvage Drones - each target a different wreck. 3) New Players - need to have much better tutorials. Lots of questions in SAK about how to access inventory, use blueprints, train skills, etc., etc. Career Level 1 agents dont really provide a tutorial for how to use a blueprint, for example. 2.) Manual control and faster vs. automatic and lower. I don't think they'll ever make them that great where you literal get the best results by hitting a single command and then go eat dinner. What I'd like to see is a utility drone bay on all non-droneboat ships (at least destroyer and up) that only fit salvage drones. No one should have to go without salvage drones. 3.) They are making a new tutorial. Their past record isn't very good though... I'd also like a area of the cargo bay segmented so that ammo or things you want to keep in the bay can be separate from random loot so it doesn't have to be sifted through when dumbing stuff in stations. I hate picking up ammo and having stuff I don't want clustering up the reload window.
RuleoftheBone Coreli Corporation Mercenary Coalition 7	Posted - 2015.12.01 11:14:33 - [58] - Quote Remove...... Remove local..... Remove local everywhere forever and ever amen........
MrsKaye Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1	Posted - 2015.12.01 19:00:33 - [59] - Quote I can only add why I don't PVP much as a casual solo player. IT'S FAR TOO EASY TO GANK SOLO'S. I've played off and on since 2011 and just dislike PVP in this game due to the one sided nature of the PVP staging that is a hard barrier to cross as a solo player. I get that small gangs are a thing, but it gets old very quickly. It's rather like going in a level 4 mission with a frigate, sure you can do it, but nothing to keep doing to build long term game value. Create barriers for gangs, so they are forced to separate and solo PVP.
Merovee Gorthaur Legion Imperium Mordor 167	Posted - 2015.12.01 21:28:59 - [60] - Quote 1. Have FW be able to conquer null sec and raise its sec to 0.5 over time. 2. Make planets part of the game play of EVE. (RTS)(Content for dust)(hover tanks for EVE) 3. Multi-player Super Capital ships that can't log off. Empire, the next new world order.

Kaska Iskalar Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 4	Posted - 2015.12.01 22:24:27 - [61] - Quote 1. Remove jump freighters to restore piracy to a viable profession. 2. Remove Concordouken and Concord invincibility and restore them to how they were in beta. 3. New characters start with 10 mil SP so they aren't completely useless.
Maldiro Selkurk CHEMO IMMUNO RESISTANT VIRUS X 532	Posted - 2015.12.03 21:48:32 - [62] - Quote 1. get rid of the CSM. 2. get rid of all free intel. 3. get rid of SOV Yawn,-á I'm right as usual. The predictability kinda gets boring really.
Dirk Magnum KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 525	Posted - 2015.12.04 14:17:00 - [63] - Quote 1) No new ships that aren't coupled to all-new game mechanics. 2) Interactive mining. At a minimum this should be akin to hacking, where you must locate the ore stream within the asteroid. After that you can mine that asteroid for as long or short a time / amount as you want without further interaction (unless it gets depleted.) 3) Absolute moratorium on any increase to player safety in any part of space, in writing (forum post) signed by all developers. Give me that and I'll support larger pools of starting SP and increased ISK rewards in the new player missions. Draw the line about what this game has always been without any ambiguity. It'll only help to retain more players. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE." - traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed]
Bianca Niam Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.12.04 14:35:15 - [64] - Quote Wardec system. Wardec system. And wardec system. Guess what drives newbros away? The wardec system and it's griefers.
Kuetlzelcoatl 11	Posted - 2015.12.04 15:44:12 - [65] - Quote -Rethink all the free intel via Local, Map Stats, Watch Lists, Locator Agents, Kill Mails, and API -Revisit warp speeds to make solar systems feel like Solar Systems instead of rooms that you can cross in seconds - (may require moving gates far closer to center of solar systems to not dramatically increase interstellar travel) -Revisit the damage system to make it more than just shoot to zero HP and boom We get way too much intel from too many sources without any meaningful gameplay being involved. As well, we move at such speeds that individual solar systems are frequently just speed bumps in our path to get where we want to. Finally, the damage system is still based upon models from the first games where zero hit points means you are dead. We should need to work for any information that we gain. We should need to scan to see how many players can be located around us. We should need to go to individual solar systems and perform some gameplay to gain any information regarding that solar system. We should not be able to determine if someone is logged into the game for free and automatically as if we are stalking them. We should not be able to locate someone with 100% accuracy unless we see them on our overview. We should not be able to determine exact fits from kill mails. Kill mails should not even exist. The API should not give out free intel that could be gained within the game via meaningful gameplay. Movement in this game is simply way too fast. We can cross multiple systems in the same time that it takes to walk to the car IRL. We can cross the entire star cluster in less time than it takes to go to a movie. We should move all gates close to the stars and decrease warp speeds so we can still move in similar time frames, but makes individual solar systems bigger. A delayed NPC logistical system should be implemented that charges you per jump with LowSec and NullSec surcharges that doesn't compete with player created logistical organizations but provides a reasonable service. Maybe 12 hrs per system movement speed. The damage model should be changed to something more interesting and realistic to where shields and Armor act as damage reduction and the damage that gets through actually damages critical components that degrade ship performance as they become more damaged. This could still allow for shield and armor tanking where the increased resistances and buffer increases the damage reduction. The critical components could allow for something similar to sub system targeting in which one could try to focus on shooting propulsion systems that could increase align times and decrease the effectiveness of prop mods. Thus, armor and shield reppers would only repair the damage reduction capacity of those systems while in space, but one would need to use other services to repair critical components, while maybe allow for backup components to be designated. There is a lot of potential with this.
Tiberius Mathusia Gallente Rebels Inc. Villore Accords 13	Posted - 2015.12.05 00:51:46 - [66] - Quote Neutrals need to be flagged as safe to shoot without a sec status penalty when they enter FW plexes. I know some people say to just wait until they've attacked you first but that's not really an option if it gives them a tactical advantage. I'm currently -4.0 (Did some clone soldier ratting to get it back down a while ago) and this is entirely down to engaging ships landing in plexes. I've no problem with there being neutrals operating in FW space or them coming into plexes looking for a fight but I'm getting tired of having to recover my sec status as a consequence . From a lore perspective it doesn't make much sense for armed warships to be flying into military complexes unchallenged.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 799	Posted - 2015.12.05 00:58:08 - [67] - Quote Tiberius Mathusia wrote: Neutrals need to be flagged as safe to shoot without a sec status penalty when they enter FW plexes. I know some people say to just wait until they've attacked you first but that's not really an option if it gives them a tactical advantage. I'm currently -4.0 (Did some clone soldier ratting to get it back down a while ago) and this is entirely down to engaging ships landing in plexes. I've no problem with there being neutrals operating in FW space or them coming into plexes looking for a fight but I'm getting tired of having to recover my sec status as a consequence . From a lore perspective it doesn't make much sense for armed warships to be flying into military complexes unchallenged. I agree. Use of fw plex site triggers suspect. Cannot remember. Is there a gate? To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 41091	Posted - 2015.12.05 01:08:21 - [68] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: I agree. Use of fw plex site triggers suspect. Cannot remember. Is there a gate? Gates are on Novice, Small and Medium plexes and mission sites. Not on Large plexes. Suspect timer on entering FW plexes is coming: http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/csm/Meetings/summit/CSM10-S1-D4.pdf (middle of page 8) also, Sugar Kyle's summary of the day 4 discussion: http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2015/10/csmx-post-30.html Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 25388	Posted - 2015.12.05 01:14:28 - [69] - Quote If you change only four letters in EVEO you get BEER.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 41092	Posted - 2015.12.05 01:27:20 - [70] - Quote . Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari

Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 115	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:03:48 - [71] - Quote 1. I wanne be able to fly a looping and belly up. 2. Moving planets, moons and stations. 3. Existing planets, where you can crash in. Not these holograms. And suns, that burn your ass if you come too close. "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen."(Zitat eines Singles) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind."(Zitat von einem, dem es egal ist)
Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 115	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:05:41 - [72] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Solecist Project wrote: If you change only four letters in EVEO you get BEER. Don't you only need to change 3? I only see 2. V and O. "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen."(Zitat eines Singles) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind."(Zitat von einem, dem es egal ist)
Titus Madullier Shades of Chaos Hams United 0	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:07:03 - [73] - Quote NUMBER ONE - they need fix cloaky campers that will stop an whole pocket A corp mate and I thought the best way to do this would be a d-scan sonar game. Now let me explain our idea. We thought of an group "game" , where you and your group of people use d-scan as sonar like battleships looking for an submarine. In this "mode" you use your d-scan and ping down the cloaky. This is way easier with a group of people trying to find one guy. #2- make plex cheaper #3- make caps requirements lower
Top Guac Mexican Avacado Syndicate 44	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:19:54 - [74] - Quote Mark O'Helm wrote: Scipio Artelius wrote: Solecist Project wrote: If you change only four letters in EVEO you get BEER. Don't you only need to change 3? I only see 2. V and O. Ok, so: V -> E O -> R Where's the B coming from? (no reshuffles allowed.....there has to be some rules in this imaginary game)
Tweek Etimua The Paragons 85	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:25:22 - [75] - Quote I rather enjoy the game qctualy. So my changes are verry unpopular and would cause a cry fest for months but. I would elimnate multi acounts, dual boxing and the communities irational love for fleeting up so that one person can dictate every action the fleet makes.
StuRyan Space Mutts 94	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:45:11 - [76] - Quote 1. I've Grown to be a big hater of fleets and how they tend to gobble up gaming styles. I've seen posts about logi and have to agree they are the i-win buttons of fleets. Its not the act of fleeting with people it's more the fact most fleets will not happen unless there is over proportional logi. Not everyone like playing the game in a 12k alliance with 30+ fleet members when roaming. 2. Not a big fan of EWAR right now. I hate how certain EWAR affects ships 2/3/4 times bigger than the agressor. Classic example being a Griffin perma jamming BS's or warp disrupters, scramblers and webs fitted to small ships preventing much larger ships from getting away. that stuff should be scaleable forcing people to bring the right ships, not just a swarm of ships. 3. I also hate this notion that if you commit to a fight you must die if it's the wrong choice. the most common situations A pilot can only make a choice through D-Scan, how do they know a 20 man gang is on the other side of a gate, or a ship is fitted with a cyno. - i just think, if you are forcing people to die, more tools should be available to help players make a more informed decision.
Top Guac Mexican Avacado Syndicate 44	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:49:54 - [77] - Quote StuRyan wrote: 3. I also hate this notion that if you commit to a fight you must die if it's the wrong choice. the most common situations A pilot can only make a choice through D-Scan, how do they know a 20 man gang is on the other side of a gate, or a ship is fitted with a cyno. - i just think, if you are forcing people to die, more tools should be available to help players make a more informed decision. Um: - a scout? - a ship scanner (more a highsec thing, but the tool exists)? - check the pilot's killboard?
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 78	Posted - 2015.12.05 02:58:08 - [78] - Quote Top Guac wrote: StuRyan wrote: 3. I also hate this notion that if you commit to a fight you must die if it's the wrong choice. the most common situations A pilot can only make a choice through D-Scan, how do they know a 20 man gang is on the other side of a gate, or a ship is fitted with a cyno. - i just think, if you are forcing people to die, more tools should be available to help players make a more informed decision. Um: - a scout? - a ship scanner (more a highsec thing, but the tool exists)? - check the pilot's killboard? yes and no. For me to really enjoy the game I want good fights. I don't enjoy using scouts as it takes the thrill away. Its a damned if you do and your damned if you don't situation. the sort of information i would be looking for is more to do with being able to recognise a cyno on a ship because i look at the ship and see a cyno module attached to it's hull. Or if there is a fleet on the other side of the gate there is a way to scan whats on the other side. Not via a module but through an interface meaning you are more in control of your game. I hate how mundane pvp has actually become and the upcoming updates don't fill me with much expectation.
StuRyan Space Mutts 94	Posted - 2015.12.05 03:09:17 - [79] - Quote Top Guac wrote: StuRyan wrote: 3. I also hate this notion that if you commit to a fight you must die if it's the wrong choice. the most common situations A pilot can only make a choice through D-Scan, how do they know a 20 man gang is on the other side of a gate, or a ship is fitted with a cyno. - i just think, if you are forcing people to die, more tools should be available to help players make a more informed decision. Um: - a scout? - a ship scanner (more a highsec thing, but the tool exists)? - check the pilot's killboard? I do use scouts I was just trying to create a more interesting and dynamic game.
Mark O'Helm Fam. Zimin von Reizgenschwendt 115	Posted - 2015.12.05 03:58:58 - [80] - Quote Top Guac wrote: Solecist Project wrote: If you change only four letters in EVEO you get BEER. Ok, so: V -> E O -> R Where's the B coming from? (no reshuffles allowed.....there has to be some rules in this imaginary game) I don't see any rules in the quote. :) "Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen. Aber Frauen wollen keine Frauenversteher. Weil Frauenversteher wissen, was Frauen wollen."(Zitat eines Singles) "Wirklich coolen Leuten ist es egal, ob sie cool sind."(Zitat von einem, dem es egal ist)

Roman Sawur Aridia Research and Exploring 0	Posted - 2015.12.05 08:50:59 - [81] - Quote I like to see the region's descriptions turned on again. I wonder, is it really such a difficult task?
Vehestian Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance 42	Posted - 2015.12.06 21:11:29 - [82] - Quote 1- space weather 2- make DUST more relevant 3- open up the jove
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 78	Posted - 2015.12.06 23:33:28 - [83] - Quote Also low sec has become nothing but gate camps consisting of ships that can insa lock and tank gate guns and log that is far enough away the decision to engage is not really questioned. Lots of things needs improving to make the game fun again.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 84	Posted - 2015.12.17 22:49:20 - [84] - Quote confirming ewar still sucks. optimal and fall off mean nothing its turning the game into massive ewar battles.
lost packet Alpha Flight 82	Posted - 2015.12.19 17:10:28 - [85] - Quote Mark O'Helm wrote: Top Guac wrote: Solecist Project wrote: If you change only four letters in EVEO you get BEER. Ok, so: V -> E O -> R Where's the B coming from? (no reshuffles allowed.....there has to be some rules in this imaginary game) I don't see any rules in the quote. :) You guys need to get out more :p
Legion Masser Rage-Machine 51	Posted - 2015.12.20 01:54:27 - [86] - Quote 1) More Ship Skins that cost $ 2) More Clothes that cost $ 3) Plex's that cost more $ SAID NOBODY CCP , said nobody GÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿó- Your Anger is a Gift -GÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿóGÿó Do you even Titan? GÿóGÿóGÿó Potato GÿóGÿóGÿóLemonGÿóGÿóGÿó
Jonas Kanjus Side Busters 24	Posted - 2015.12.20 06:22:35 - [87] - Quote For me, it would be the following: 1.) Rework all ships to be modular like T3 cruisers. Maybe not destroyers, frigates and shuttles, though. Ever since the introduction of T3 cruisers, I've felt that having modular ships should have been present from the beginning. 2.) Rework the HUD. I've always had a certain dislike for the layout of our HUD. I'd like to see an entire bar at the bottom or top of screen dedicated to ship health, cap amount and slot layout. Doing this would open up the viewable space some. 3.) I'll have to think about #3 some more. My start date to EVE Online: 6/25/2005 8:24:57 AM UTC
Iria Ahrens Space Perverts and Forum Pirates 427	Posted - 2015.12.20 07:09:49 - [88] - Quote Three things? 1. I want to change the text size!!! Come on. Resolutions keep going up which makes the text smaller, and my eyesight isn't getting better. It doesn't matter that I can make text 12pt or 13pt when 12 pt looks like 5pt because of the resolution. I'm pretty sure a lot of the mission orders and such are all xml, so let us change the size to whatever we need! 2. Text Size 3. Text Size. This is a big deal and a long time overdue. They keep on improving the interface but don't do anything to make the text more readable. My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 28098	Posted - 2015.12.20 10:32:22 - [89] - Quote Iria Ahrens wrote: Three things? 1. I want to change the text size!!! Come on. Resolutions keep going up which makes the text smaller, and my eyesight isn't getting better. It doesn't matter that I can make text 12pt or 13pt when 12 pt looks like 5pt because of the resolution. I'm pretty sure a lot of the mission orders and such are all xml, so let us change the size to whatever we need! 2. Text Size 3. Text Size. This is a big deal and a long time overdue. They keep on improving the interface but don't do anything to make the text more readable. Decrease resolution. Increase AA. You might notice that there's barely a reduction in visual quality while improving the fps. Most people have no clue how greatly this little hint works. I identify as Sol-kin and I oppose all WiSgender because the white priviledged spacists just want to oppress me with their Avatariarchy. Once the carebears are eradicated, I will stand before them, screaming... THE GAME ! (: You lost... :)
Artemis Ellery Sazas Shock and Awe Inc. 62	Posted - 2015.12.20 11:43:00 - [90] - Quote Buff null sec at least 100% for bounties, mining, pi and increase escalations and faction or ded loot drops. Make bumping outside the docking ring a criminal offense. I watched a freighter get bumped for almost 30 minutes before the gank fleet mobilized. The gank was cool, but the bumping to set up the gank was the most ******** thing I ever watched. Form a fleet, camp a gate and do a proper gank. Even though I am one of those nuets that enter FW Plexes to fight, I am thinking the new changes will get me even more action. If I am reading correctly, FW pilots will be able to engage me freely, which seems only fair.

Iria Ahrens Space Perverts and Forum Pirates 431	Posted - 2015.12.20 16:22:39 - [91] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: Iria Ahrens wrote: Three things? 1. I want to change the text size!!! Come on. Resolutions keep going up which makes the text smaller, and my eyesight isn't getting better. It doesn't matter that I can make text 12pt or 13pt when 12 pt looks like 5pt because of the resolution. I'm pretty sure a lot of the mission orders and such are all xml, so let us change the size to whatever we need! 2. Text Size 3. Text Size. This is a big deal and a long time overdue. They keep on improving the interface but don't do anything to make the text more readable. Decrease resolution. Increase AA. You might notice that there's barely a reduction in visual quality while improving the fps. Most people have no clue how greatly this little hint works. Unfortunately, Flat screens seem to shait themselves when they are in non-native resolution. So this trick worked with CRT monitors but not so well with laptop screens. Right now EVE is unplayable because I made the mistake of installing the new launcher and it changes the resolution to non-native and everything is super pixilated. My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.
Linna Excel Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 247	Posted - 2015.12.20 19:55:44 - [92] - Quote 1. Logis - they seem to be the biggest problem with needing N+1 2. Ease access into PvP, fly what you can lose means most people won't fly more than a t1 frig or cruiser, skill times are a ***** when you need a lot of them, if you are new to PvP finding a winnable fight can seem a daunting task, etc. 3. I think I'd allow players to be able to change the sec status of a system up or down for most systems and I'd change how concorde responds from a definite thing to a percentage based issue that depends on the sec status of your system. I can has blogging skills!
Demica Diaz SE-1 161	Posted - 2015.12.21 09:02:28 - [93] - Quote 1. Port Dust 514 to PC, make that your EVE character can play Dust 514, expand from DUST to WiS. From WiS to exploring ruins ect from inside in first person / 3rd person. To finally walking in your space ship and flying in your ship with friends. (Yes a lot of this from SC but I rather play EVE because I love its lore). Port Valkyrie to PC and allow your EVE pilot to fly. 2. See above... 3. Check number 1 option.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17069	Posted - 2015.12.21 09:58:25 - [94] - Quote 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Mithandra Catastrophic Operations Get Off My Lawn 366	Posted - 2015.12.21 15:38:29 - [95] - Quote 1. remove the forums. 2. 3. Actually that's all I've got. Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Mithandra Catastrophic Operations Get Off My Lawn 366	Posted - 2015.12.21 15:39:29 - [96] - Quote baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4418	Posted - 2015.12.21 17:19:45 - [97] - Quote baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 You mean that bringing more people to a fight should not be rewarded by game mechanics? That's so un-EVE! CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 28249	Posted - 2015.12.21 17:24:49 - [98] - Quote Iria Ahrens wrote: Solecist Project wrote: Iria Ahrens wrote: Three things? 1. I want to change the text size!!! Come on. Resolutions keep going up which makes the text smaller, and my eyesight isn't getting better. It doesn't matter that I can make text 12pt or 13pt when 12 pt looks like 5pt because of the resolution. I'm pretty sure a lot of the mission orders and such are all xml, so let us change the size to whatever we need! 2. Text Size 3. Text Size. This is a big deal and a long time overdue. They keep on improving the interface but don't do anything to make the text more readable. Decrease resolution. Increase AA. You might notice that there's barely a reduction in visual quality while improving the fps. Most people have no clue how greatly this little hint works. Unfortunately, Flat screens seem to shait themselves when they are in non-native resolution. So this trick worked with CRT monitors but not so well with laptop screens. Right now EVE is unplayable because I made the mistake of installing the new launcher and it changes the resolution to non-native and everything is super pixilated. I am still using this, the issue you have is non existent for me. Though I admit I always aim at high dpi, which migh5 have influence. Running 1920x1080 @ 15.6", would have gone smaller but was out of budget. You really only need to pick a proper resolution anyway. AA takes care of the rest. AA is there to hide the pixelation! It works better than most expect. Like... you would, for example. :) Oh and sorry, but I can not take you seriously when you claim it's unplayable, because of pixelation... I identify as Sol-kin and I oppose all WiSgender because the white priviledged spacists just want to oppress me with their Avatariarchy. Once the carebears are eradicated, I will stand before them, screaming... THE GAME ! (: You lost... :)
James Joiner Celestial Effect Interstellar Expansion 0	Posted - 2015.12.21 18:00:50 - [99] - Quote I would love it if they gave you options for AI voice. Running 2 accounts at the same time would be allot easer if you could tell which one was talking to you. At the very least give us male and female.
Iria Ahrens Space Perverts and Forum Pirates 438	Posted - 2015.12.21 18:32:24 - [100] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: Oh and sorry, but I can not take you seriously when you claim it's unplayable, because of pixelation... If text is not readable the game is unplayable. http://imgur.com/J4AMg7B My choice of pronouns is based on your avatar. Even if I know what is behind the avatar.

Souxie Alduin Anarchy in the Eve 146	Posted - 2015.12.21 19:16:28 - [101] - Quote 1) Harsher consequences for criminal activity with more possibilities for players to get in on the action. Player customs agents, player CONCORD etc. 2) WIS. Screw shiny graphics. Just nail the game-play first and polish later. 3) Turn planetary interaction into a "proper" RTS and tie it in with Dust/Legion/WIS/Valkyrie.
Pix Severus Mew Age Outpaws 1436	Posted - 2015.12.21 21:57:28 - [102] - Quote 1) Disallow faction frigates from T1 plexes. This will make them a true newbie friendly intro to PvP. 2) Remove off-grid boosting for PvP. 3) Give new players (new accounts only) 20 T1 frigates of their choosing when they start the game. They get a further 20 T1 destroyers upon their first completion of the tutorial. This will help them to see ships as disposable assets, and encourage them to get out there and take more risks. My lord.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17082	Posted - 2015.12.22 08:12:00 - [103] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 You mean that bringing more people to a fight should not be rewarded by game mechanics? That's so un-EVE! The problem is when you have 100 v 200 and the 100 don't get a single kill. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17082	Posted - 2015.12.22 08:13:35 - [104] - Quote Mithandra wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Nope, incursions and level 4 missions are much better than null sov income which earns around the same as highsec level 3 missions. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4419	Posted - 2015.12.22 09:49:23 - [105] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 You mean that bringing more people to a fight should not be rewarded by game mechanics? That's so un-EVE! The problem is when you have 100 v 200 and the 100 don't get a single kill. Yes that's a problem, but also is in the nature of the game. EVE rewards numbers, period. Any change to logistics will be eventually negated by just bringing in more ships. Let's say that applied logi links had stacking penalties, efffectively capping maximum EHP to a sensible amount... say 4x the local reps... then the obvious answer is to bring a) enough logi to provide the capped EHP to all your DPS ships and b) enough DPS ships to instapop capped EHP ships. Which is about as fun as the current situation. Now, if incoming DPS also had a stacking penalty... or EVE had Line Of Sight mechanics... and even LOS+ friendly damage... ...then it would be such a different game that we could call it EVE 2.0. CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 17083	Posted - 2015.12.22 12:41:18 - [106] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: baltec1 wrote: Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 You mean that bringing more people to a fight should not be rewarded by game mechanics? That's so un-EVE! The problem is when you have 100 v 200 and the 100 don't get a single kill. Yes that's a problem, but also is in the nature of the game. EVE rewards numbers, period. Any change to logistics will be eventually negated by just bringing in more ships. Let's say that applied logi links had stacking penalties, efffectively capping maximum EHP to a sensible amount... say 4x the local reps... then the obvious answer is to bring a) enough logi to provide the capped EHP to all your DPS ships and b) enough DPS ships to instapop capped EHP ships. Which is about as fun as the current situation. Now, if incoming DPS also had a stacking penalty... or EVE had Line Of Sight mechanics... and even LOS+ friendly damage... ...then it would be such a different game that we could call it EVE 2.0. I'll take taking part of the enemy fleet with me when I die than the current one sided slaughters. People are a lot more willing to undock a fleet if they can actually do damage to the enemy. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Nachtengel von Rothschild 8	Posted - 2015.12.22 12:56:12 - [107] - Quote 1. WiS - so I can play isk poker in some trade hub stations 2. Dust for PC aka "project legion" 3. Make one CCP game launcher where I can use the same account to play either dust or eve. subbing gives access to both games, and both games should interact on the same server... using the same markets 4. it would be cool if WiS continued and added cities on planets, but this would make more sense if the game was more popular... i really wanted to play world of darkness ;\
Mithandra Catastrophic Operations Get Off My Lawn 377	Posted - 2015.12.22 13:05:52 - [108] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Mithandra wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Nope, incursions and level 4 missions are much better than null sov income which earns around the same as highsec level 3 missions. Having done both, I'm farming sanctums and escalations in nullsec space for more isk and much less risk. Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Voxinian 97	Posted - 2015.12.22 14:35:49 - [109] - Quote PvE overhaul... PvE outside missions. Though I believe the roaming sleeprs will be an upstep to some new PvE thing? Been away for to long so not completely sure where the sleepers will lead to in the future. I don't have time to be in an active corp so PvE is all there is for me besides some random PvP encounters.
Kiandoshia Applied Anarchy ChaosTheory. 2388	Posted - 2015.12.22 18:08:42 - [110] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Mithandra wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Nope, incursions and level 4 missions are much better than null sov income which earns around the same as highsec level 3 missions. For the individual player, incursions might be much better than ratting in 0.0 but all the incursions that are alive at the same time can't sustain anywhere near the amount of people 0.0 ratting can sustain. L4s are pretty much on par with 0.0 ratting, although L4s give you far fewer faction drops and escalations.

Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 84	Posted - 2016.01.01 15:33:01 - [111] - Quote Just experienced what I said would happen eventually with the logi mechanic. 9 frigate logi 3 AF dps ships, What makes this worse is that the engagement occurred in a 0.4 on a gate and the criminals were able to tank the gate guns. Personally feel that if you want people creating highly engaging content a lot of things needs to change with logi and for that matter ewar too.
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 385	Posted - 2016.01.01 16:50:03 - [112] - Quote Moon Goo depletion due to moon mining, following the PI model source: https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Planetary_interaction Depletion works pretty much as you would expect but here are some important facts. * A short extractor program that is constantly re-submitted on the same hot spot depletes more aggressively than a long program with the same amount of extractor heads * Depleted resources re-generate over time * You can achieve equilibrium by pulling out the same amount of resources that the planet re-generates. ItGÇÖs a balance act. Nuggets are temporary hot spots that sometimes appear on planets. You will not necessary be able to identify them but if you compared the resource map on a planet over days you would see that the hot spots sometimes appear and move around a little. To capitalize on the nuggets, make sure you look for hot spots before submitting a program, since they might have moved. Regards, a Freelancer The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?
MidnightWyvern Night Theifs 131	Posted - 2016.01.01 17:36:15 - [113] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? I am PVP orientated so my three things are all aimed at trying to get people out of their comfort zones and away from being risk averse and get people looking for the GF's rather than the safe fights. 1. EWAR - needs a complete rethink, this contributes the biggest factor of risk aversion and is an "I WIN" button. 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. 3. Neutral repping ships in wars; another contribution to the massive risk aversion. I now wait the forum trolls to try to frame the my 3 points as fail. Before you do I want you to consider what the game used to be like before EWAR and Logi came into the game, that period of the game was the most enjoyable for me and many of the friends I made who unsubbed for the reasons of trying to make content but always competing against the game plays that roll out with the points above. Number 2 just annoys me. When I first started this game with the Corp I'm in right now, we did nothing but Kitchen Sink roams, and we never had Logi. We fit our ships for solo PvP and then flew as a group and made tactics up on the fly. I had so much fun in all of those fleets and we got some really memorable fights. I just wish I had some recording software back then. Souxie Alduin wrote: 1) Harsher consequences for criminal activity with more possibilities for players to get in on the action. Player customs agents, player CONCORD etc. 2) WIS. Screw shiny graphics. Just nail the game-play first and polish later. 3) Turn planetary interaction into a "proper" RTS and tie it in with Dust/Legion/WIS/Valkyrie. Cannot stress enough how much I support Number 3. All of us who play Dust 514 have been hoping for that for *years*. I would add for the Dust side that CCP Shanghai should allow us to pledge loyalty to factions in FW and then select our deployment locations. Right now the system creates matches in systems with the highest plex-running activity EVE-side and doesn't use matchmaking, which frequently results in EVE players being unable to capture systems because the Dust team for their faction is a bunch of random players queueing solo up against a full 8-man squad or two for the other side. _#portDust514 Don't let interactions like this become only a memory. (EVE alt> Sarayu Wyvern. Dust 514 alt> Mobius Wyvern.)
Shawn Amelana Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2016.01.02 01:31:31 - [114] - Quote 1. ) I would add WIS with FPS combat that allows for boarding parties mostly used take over of Battleship + sized ships and Soon to be Citadels. this way, a fleet of titans will be a bad thing when a fleet of frigates abandon their ships to take over your titans :D 2. ) More variety of ships of the same lvl/tech using different weapon systems, or even selectable weapon bonuses instead of new ships. think of a like attack battlecruisers, a Caldari version with cruise missiles or a amarr corercer with missles or more drone ship options. basically just more options 3. ) Bring back the missing bra bug
Akirei Scytale Okami Syndicate 3610	Posted - 2016.01.03 12:33:47 - [115] - Quote I'd return the jukebox. Then I'd remove it again, just to **** with everyone. Then I'd reinstate it, because I'm not a cold heartless bastard.
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 7245	Posted - 2016.01.03 13:51:55 - [116] - Quote Three things I would change if I could: 1. Every ship could dial in a warp pretty much the way we see them do it in the various science fiction genres. Forcing people through fatal funnels and gate raep is a buzz kill. Let all the players travel freely, to given extents. Since this is an academic discussion, I won't bother with the mechanics, rules, etc. You want PVP and conflict, break down the great wall of Carebear and let space be huge and chaotic. 2. Fleet primary F1 monkey stuff is boring and also takes a lot away from combat. How is it that 30 ships can lock one ship for OMGWTFPWN instaBBQ? Want to address being risk averse, certain death makes people risk averse whether it's small gang or fleet PVP and raep cages at gates. I would have set it up so that a ship of given signature can only be locked up by so many other ships before signal degradation and interference would become a factor preventing further locks (I have experience with military radar systems and have seen this sort of thing) . Thus a frigate would only be locked up by 2-3 frigates or 5-6 drones. A cruiser can be locked up by 7-8 frigates but only 2-3 other cruisers, and so on. A capital of course would take a lot of locks, presumably. This kind of feature would actually make fleet engagements mean more than "bigger blob theory". Players would have to engage on the "wing" level and use real tactics and maneuvers instead of being clustered around logistics. Small gang engagements would also benefit. 3. The total separation of security status of systems by systems has an effect that allows much aversion while at the same time, denies risk. Instead of Highsec/lowsec/nullsec structures on the system level, I would have set it up so that every system has highsec in the "inner space" regions of said system. Imagine if I wanted to attack the space station in our own orbit and how much trouble I would get into but if I wanted to graffiti one of our Mars rovers and had the means to do it, and wore a mask in case the camera on that thing was still workign, who would know? Thus the interior of most highsec systems would be as we usually see it, but once you get out into the distant orbits of planets that do not sustain life (and have less commerce) Concorde takes longer to respond until they don't bother at all, but they would still know what you did (lowsec). Beyond that, out into the far reaches of every system, nullsec, with all the trappings of nullsec as we know of it today. By putting the security zones in each system it would allow for more flexibility and opportunities for the casual players, just as would item number 1. Those are the three things I would change, but I would throw in a 4. 4. Make all resources finite. All warfare of significance boils down to resources (living space is a resource as that is limited and the only resources limited in this game so far). That means if everybody and their brother wants to mine a system out, then that system runs out of resources. If you want to suck the moons dry then you have dead moons and might have to kill your neighbor for more, or if you are prudent about your resources but your neighbor was not, they will have to kill you. I would boost material salvage to guard against shortages and also make salvage important again. That is, when you salvage a shipwreck you can pull in almost enough materials to build another ship like that again. There would be just as much fighting over salvage of scrap metal and materials as there was over the resources. These things would, if implemented, make this game the bubbling cauldron of PVP that many say it should be. For too long (waxing poetic warning) players have sat on their moon goo and in their bling boats with impunity. Pump fist and all that. I'm tired. Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 29770	Posted - 2016.01.03 15:01:28 - [117] - Quote I would let every single one who keeps pingponging arguments back and forth be removed from the forums. Banned for lifetime. Every hypocrite, doomsayer and liar banned. Everyone banned who makes up or deliberately misinterprets data. Oh and not to forget those who complain about free gifts or the price of the monthly sub. Ban them all. Forever. That is all. Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
sero Hita Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 78	Posted - 2016.01.03 15:36:14 - [118] - Quote Solecist Project wrote: I would let every single one who keeps pingponging arguments back and forth be removed from the forums. Banned for lifetime. Every hypocrite, doomsayer and liar banned. Everyone banned who makes up or deliberately misinterprets data. Oh and not to forget those who complain about free gifts or the price of the monthly sub. Ban them all. Forever. That is all. Beware of staring too much into the sun, you might go blind on topic: -I would remove FW missions, as they don't fit into the whole idea behind FW (contesting systems, small ship and group pvp) IMO. -Change one of the subsystems of the T3C, so they cannot carry links anymore. I think BCs, CS and CD only should have this ability. - I would also like the ability to fit multiple ships of one type hull at once, with the same fitting. So it is faster when preparing ships for fleets.
morion Lighting Build 32	Posted - 2016.01.04 13:21:13 - [119] - Quote market transactions between alts to distort market activity cancel. When done between the same player of multiple accounts. also candlestick market charts with 10 years history.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 85	Posted - 2016.01.04 14:20:23 - [120] - Quote > yup logi > no > no logi > no logi > you have 5 inquisitors in the large already > no > we have 1000 titan > somebody anchor scan inhibitor > and then we can fight > you bring worthless 20k ehp punishers and a full squad of logi > and expect a good fight xD Sums it up really

Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 30048	Posted - 2016.01.04 14:30:27 - [121] - Quote sero Hita wrote: Solecist Project wrote: I would let every single one who keeps pingponging arguments back and forth be removed from the forums. Banned for lifetime. Every hypocrite, doomsayer and liar banned. Everyone banned who makes up or deliberately misinterprets data. Oh and not to forget those who complain about free gifts or the price of the monthly sub. Ban them all. Forever. That is all. Beware of staring too much into the sun, you might go blind on topic: -I would remove FW missions, as they don't fit into the whole idea behind FW (contesting systems, small ship and group pvp) IMO. -Change one of the subsystems of the T3C, so they cannot carry links anymore. I think BCs, CS and CD only should have this ability. - I would also like the ability to fit multiple ships of one type hull at once, with the same fitting. So it is faster when preparing ships for fleets. Hey hey hey, none of these apply to me. I always tell you honestly what I think ... ... and never hide the true meaning behind words. Sadly that gets me into more trouble than those who deserve it. :P Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
DeadDuck The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance 186	Posted - 2016.01.04 15:05:27 - [122] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse making it dull, boring and predictable. As much as that makes this sound like a rant, it's far from it. The question is what 3 things would you change of eve pvp? Been playing EVE since 2005 non-stop, entirely devoted to PVP. For the 1st time ever, I stop playing it!... You are right, the game has become very risk averse making it very, very boring. So boring that I really I'm not in the mood to play it. Maybe it's just a phase but for someone that was such a hard core player these are news. What I think are the main problems in EVE? 1) Completely failed sov system. Why go conquer something if it is so dull and you really dont have a reason for it. Make the resources (moon mins, gas clouds whatever being finite and you might have a reason to go conquer something) 2) Super Cap Hyper Inflation. It really killed Sov warfare. The new super cap revamp will not almost for sure adress the main issue. There are simply to many in game. 3) Outposts will be destrutable on a short term. I'm gonna tell you what will happen: during months people will be all happy killing these structures and then, the game will collapse. 0.0 will be really empty cause nobody will want to live in there. TBH I really don't care at the moment.
Elyia Suze Nagala Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 66	Posted - 2016.01.04 15:53:46 - [123] - Quote That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions. Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead.
Elyia Suze Nagala Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 68	Posted - 2016.01.04 15:55:55 - [124] - Quote Elyia Suze Nagala wrote: That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions. Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead. If I could get a forth, people need to stop being little Pusskins are cry OP, cry about their experiences, blah, blah.
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 30086	Posted - 2016.01.04 16:07:34 - [125] - Quote Elyia Suze Nagala wrote: That everyone has to have an opinion. That everyone cannot accept other people's opinions. And, that people, including CCP feel pressure to conform to other people's opinions. Now you all shut it and keep playing. EvE isn't Dead. It's less that they have one. It's more that 99.9% of the broad mass feel entitled to having one ... ... while being clueless about how to form a proper one, plus DunningKruger. Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: The game has changed little from my point of view ... yet here I am, playing again with 3 accounts...
Arla Sarain 725	Posted - 2016.01.04 17:53:43 - [126] - Quote HeXxploiT wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: The game has become very risk averse... Perhaps you should stop flying cheap ships and then tell me it's risk averse. I assure you if you're flying in something bigger and more expensive than an atron with T1 rigs you'll find the game a little more interesting. Try fitting up a couple of blingy cruisers or faction battleships, go do some pvp in low or nul and then come back and tell me how risk averse it is. Troll... Thread should be moved to reddit so posts like this could be downvoted and not displayed with the threshold.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 86	Posted - 2016.01.05 13:28:18 - [127] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Revisit flight/movement physics. Defo - I think the days of being able to lock a target and F1 are becoming numbered. I'd like to see a the game take on the challenge of creating a system where the user can decide what to target, This whole shield, Armour, hull business can be vastly improved if it were to be attached to being able to target and destroy certain systems.
Solecist Project The Scope Gallente Federation 30348	Posted - 2016.01.05 14:02:52 - [128] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: Arla Sarain wrote: Revisit flight/movement physics. Defo - I think the days of being able to lock a target and F1 are becoming numbered. I'd like to see a the game take on the challenge of creating a system where the user can decide what to target, This whole shield, Armour, hull business can be vastly improved if it were to be attached to being able to target and destroy certain systems. You have to get through shields first, though ... ... which means a global metashift towards shieldbuffer ... ... to avoid having systems on the ship being attacked. RoAnnon wrote: O Bob, wonGÇÖt you buy a new Svipul for me I just scanned for sites and I found a C3 The fleet is now forming, FC wants T3s O Bob, wonGÇÖt you buy a new Svipul for me
Notorious Fellon 360	Posted - 2016.01.05 14:55:40 - [129] - Quote 1: Change Logi so it cannot perma-rep (both PVP and PVE methods). Make it strategic, not infinite. Many options to make this happen. Example: make remote reps require a fuel or make them never cap stable and make logi ships unable to receive cap transfer. 2: Fix ECM and ECCM. Reducing maximum target count is an interesting proposal mentioned earlier. Personally I think we need ships to have "Utility Mid Slots" which cannot contain any tank. ECCM, Tracking, Targetting mods would then be a viable option on more ships without risking tank balance. 3: Fix SOV. Latest iteration is not even close to any of the ideas proposed in several threadnaughts. Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
SetSail ForEpicFail KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 13	Posted - 2016.01.05 15:04:02 - [130] - Quote i whould whitout any form of warnings turn jita into a nullsec system and surrounding systems into lowsec. than grab my popcorns and watch the forum drama

Soltys 42	Posted - 2016.01.05 17:52:47 - [131] - Quote 1) Change undepletable static resources to dynamic, depletable and slowly self-renewable to some other resource from the same group in some other place. That obviously includes not only moon goo, but also other quasi-static resources diligently respawning or refilling in same places. 2) Divide volume of ammo pieces by 10. At least. Or add separate ammo bay to all combat ships. 3) Start reading and implementing stuff from "small things" thread, instead of de-facto treating it as a local trashcan. Jita Flipping Inc.: Solmp / Kovl
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 86	Posted - 2016.01.18 09:57:51 - [132] - Quote So I guess i am looking foward to seeing the demise of off grid boosters.
TheDamned Galactic Relic Hunters Unity 14	Posted - 2016.01.19 05:48:30 - [133] - Quote Personally, I LOVE having to use a skill to level it. I remember doing 8x8 in Ultima Online for skill increases. haha Something about using skills and seeing .01 increase is somehow exciting and forces people to actually do what they are trying to level up for.
Djsaeu Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 15	Posted - 2016.01.19 13:49:28 - [134] - Quote The name of the "Ship Tree" really someone could of came up with a better name. How about.... CASE C: Concord A: Acknowledged S: Ship E: Encyclopedia Just a thought on that.
Trader20 Hedion University Amarr Empire 4	Posted - 2016.01.20 02:52:04 - [135] - Quote 1. More PvE content. After years of pvp I'm just discovering that Eve has such great content and story that it's a shame that pve is pushed to the side. The Eve universe is certainly more interesting then gate/station camping and kill mail whoring and the drama that comes with interacting with mostly emo personalities, yes you. 2. ECM, do something, anything. Make a list of ideas to change it and throw a dart at it to choose. 3. Option to turn off nebulae for improved performance (laptop users, multi boxers). Not all space has to be a cotton candy lava lamp.
Battlingbean Star Frontiers Brotherhood of Spacers 35	Posted - 2016.01.20 07:50:47 - [136] - Quote IGÇÖd like to change 4 things. However, last change would just be fun. 1)Micro warp drives: Ships are way too fast. IGÇÖve thought that ever since I first saw a micro warp driving ship back in the day. 500+% bonus to velocity? LOLwut? Of course IGÇÖll fit that to every ship I own. The speed and drawbacks should be less extreme. 2)Remove or Redesign Black ops bridging: Completely broken mechanic. Dude can be afk and un-removable in your system, then suddenly not be afk and have 20 friends backing him up. IGÇÖve been on both sides of this encounter and neither is particularly fun. Without black ops bridging, afk cloakers are no longer a problem. 3)Remove kill boards: The true cause of risk aversion. Also, I shouldnGÇÖt be able to look up everything about someoneGÇÖs flying habits 4)Redesign Rail guns and Artillery: -Make rail guns into sniper rifles. Give them High alpha, extreme optimal, but low tracking and falloff, low ROF and high cap use per shot for difficult sustained fire. Do much more kinetic damage than thermal. -Blasters the opposite. Excellent tracking, ROF, cap usage for sustained fire and great dps, but low optimal, falloff and alpha damage. Do more thermal damage than kinetic. - Then Artillery is the more moderate long range weapon with no cap use and high falloff etc. Also ECM is fine. It has an important position in fleet compositions, and suffers a myriad of counters last of which is ECCM. Please stop whining about it.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 86	Posted - 2016.01.20 14:19:07 - [137] - Quote Just seen this handbags in local. GG [13:21:45] Person A > lol? [13:21:59] Person A > why warp off [13:22:09] Person B > I know your game [13:22:30] Person A > What? [13:22:50] Person B > I've fought you 6 times in the last 2 weeks and I've realized you don't fly alone. [13:23:21] Person A > Meh OK dude, don't pvp and be safe then [13:24:19] Person B > Listen I've played the game for 7 years, I've watched the game go from "lets go and shoot stuff" to "Dude stop dying your ruining our killboard" [13:25:43] Person A > Go join Risk aversion club [13:27:27] Person B > Wut? You want to lay that one on me and you're the one flying around with ECM back-up, [13:28:54] Person B > I couldn't care less about losing my ships as it's only pixels but I certainly am not just going to sit there whilst your ECM, scramb and neut paralyze me.
Nana Skalski Poseidaon 3283	Posted - 2016.01.21 07:54:24 - [138] - Quote looks of: Imicus Burst Bantam ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ GòáGò¼GòªGò¼Gòú - my sandcastle ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ <=X - my yacht
Professor Humbert Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium 11	Posted - 2016.01.21 08:27:05 - [139] - Quote 3 things, eh? 1) Too many windows. Especially chat windows. 2) increased number of overview tabs active 3) Allow us to move the ship control panel in vertical axis, too
Thorian Baalnorn Bad Influence I N G L O R I O U S 19	Posted - 2016.01.21 17:09:37 - [140] - Quote Without reading the other post in this thread i would change a few things. Trying not to go into to much detail( which is hard for me) : 1) I would shrink empire down to one or two regions per faction. I would expand null into current empire space. In the middle of null space at roughly intervals of 20-30 jumps from low sec would be faction( such as caladari, amarr, etc) faction outpost regions or constellations. These would consist of a few high sec systems and 2-3 times many low sec regions. surrounded by null space. My version of eve would be a spider web system. The center would be empire as described above. The intersections between two points on a web would be like outpost systems. and the threads to those would be low sec and all the empty space would be null. Then outpost systems would have a special sec status called Osec. this would be .3 lower than an equivalent empire sec in terms of PVE interaction but still have the high sec security. Example: .7 Osec would have the same security in relation to players that high sec 1.0 has but have the pve content of a .7 system. This would be an incentive to get people out of the center of the web, even if they dont want to dip their feet into null. Furthermore i would make a simple t3 industrial that has a few options on a single subsystem slot including high capacity and jump drive( like black ops). I would make a super freighter( super cap) with high capacity and long jump range( about 15-18 LY max). Both of these could use "Concord Jump Beacons" in certain high sec systems only to allow a decent flow of trade across the spread out empire. This would later be followed by the ability of players on the outskirts of known space to explore new wormholes with new rats and basically add these systems( if they wish) to empire by setting up warp gates and settling the system( local would be tied to having a warp gate. Players would literally be able to expand the known eve universe through their actions. Make the sandbox bigger rather than playing in the current size one. Overall i would expect this to spread people out more across eve and create some very interesting opportunities across all professions and give players a ton more of options on how to affect their sandbox. 2) I would redo alliances and the whole alliance system. Not really sure yet on how i would change this as i havent thought much about it. But big alliances would be a thing of the past, huge blue lists would be a thing of the past, coalitions would be a thing of the past. One thing i thought of in this regard is to limit alliance size to around 2000-3000 members or maybe 100-1000 unique members( alts do not count but their would be strict and dire consequences for trying to work around this limitation including the deletion of characters or forcing them to stay in a NPC corp for a year or something. no limit on number of corps in an alliance. Allowing blue lists but they cost an increasing amount of money for number of people that are blued. IE: some small alliances in an area blue each other and you have about 1000 blues, its a manageable amount of isk to maintain the list. If you want to blue 1/2 of eve your going to pay hundreds of billions per week to maintain that list. The same with red and orange standings. My goal would to get people to be more diverse and have to make choices about how much space to take and how to defend it. rather than " i got 6 alliances that are blue so we are good for 40 jumps in any direction. And it would make alliances depend on themselves to be more self sufficient and help discourage renting. ( honestly i would probably just make renting illegal. It encourages people to take space they dont need or use and discourages others from trying to take space. and thats a catalyst for the current situation in eve null) 3) Lastly , and CCP is already working on this, i would make it harder to blob and take space with blobs. I would create an environment in which little alliances from 100 to 1000 members could thrive. But alliances could still take a decent amount of space( no hard limit) but it becomes decreasingly hard to defend a larger empire. My overall goal in eve would be to spread people out more and make it less appealing for alliances to just doze over a bunch of other alliances and rent the space out but still maintain the concept of " if you want space you have to defend it." Right now we have " if you want space you have to rent it, or have a 300-400 man blob with a large bank account" You would have the option to take new space or to take someone elses space. But your going to work for your space either way and your going to have to work to keep it.

Ginnie School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 78	Posted - 2016.01.21 17:23:03 - [141] - Quote I'm not gonna lie, I am extremely risk adverse. I only fly a T1 ship with T1 equip while exploring Low Sec. I won't scan down and loot a Data or Relic site if anyone else is in the system. If I'm in the middle of a hack and someone appears in Local, I immediately unlock the target, cloak and wait for them to leave. If they don't leave, then I leave. Other players want my tears and I am not going to give them any. And before you ask, this is not a forum alt, but Ginnie doesn't get a lot of action. Manufacturing rigs out of salvage and improving blueprints...not much action, but profitable nonetheless. All that we see or seem is but a dream within a dream. -Edgar Allan Poe
IIshira School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 1324	Posted - 2016.01.21 18:41:42 - [142] - Quote 1) Remove RMT altogether. Yea I know it won't happen but the question is 3 things I would change not CCP 2) Make solo play at higher levels more difficult. Both in PVP and PVE. Eve is an MMO so I think the second "M" should be encouraged. 3) Add more complexity to the game... This game needs more complexity because at it's core it's very borning... "Press F1, Die, Reship, Repeat". CCP has been on a path to simplify things for new players and I feel that's a big mistake. Yes complex may intimidate new players at first but in six months new players aren't new anymore and simple will bore them.
Rykker Bow The Scope 225	Posted - 2016.01.21 19:16:42 - [143] - Quote I think I'd change forum rules to prohibit 'what would you change' and 'xxxxxx is way over powered' threads. That's all. I think the game is awesome the way it is. Problems or challenges that come up, there's usually a work around. The Mjolnir Bloc - Lowsec PvP for the sophisticated - The Mjolnir Bloc Killboards
Murauke Assisted Homicide 15	Posted - 2016.01.22 11:05:51 - [144] - Quote IIshira wrote: 1) Remove RMT altogether. Yea I know it won't happen but the question is 3 things I would change not CCP 2) Make solo play at higher levels more difficult. Both in PVP and PVE. Eve is an MMO so I think the second "M" should be encouraged. 3) Add more complexity to the game... This game needs more complexity because at it's core it's very borning... "Press F1, Die, Reship, Repeat". CCP has been on a path to simplify things for new players and I feel that's a big mistake. Yes complex may intimidate new players at first but in six months new players aren't new anymore and simple will bore them. Not sure about #2. I get it , it's an MMO meant to be played in groups, problem is if you look at the research of gamification it says that true engagement is achieved when everyone in the group feels they contributed to the task. A lot of the tasks in PVP are just "lock, f1, repeat" and whilst yes it is a MMO, the people more likely to provide content are the onces that prefer doing things solo.
Amber Starview Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 62	Posted - 2016.01.22 15:20:10 - [145] - Quote 1 ... More lore and more old battle locations like BR Titan graveyard but they should be all over space with attached battle write up telling us about what exactly happened and why/when 2 ... Major Trade hub located only in dangerous space ,other smaller in high but nothing bigger than say rens or hek 3 ... Removal of npc corps
Nikita Shirakami BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP RAZOR Alliance 0	Posted - 2016.01.23 10:46:12 - [146] - Quote I'm mainly a miner \ industry player (inb4 don't mine) - Make mining interactive similar to the hacking mini game, give us huge asteroids where we have to manually direct our mining lasers through a 3d model of the asteroid in an ore scanner window, to access the best ores and if we screw up we hit a gas pocket and our ship gets damaged. - Cruiser Class mining vessels pretty please... Mining is the cornerstone of Eve and we don't get any love at all
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 382	Posted - 2016.01.23 16:12:32 - [147] - Quote 1. A new way of altering ships. When ships are balanced, instead of changing all existing ships to match the new versions, just change the blueprints and leave the ships alone. So potentially somebody could still have a years-old Ishtar with full drone bonus - but it would be rare, of limited supply, valuable, perhaps a collector's item to not be used again. Or somebody could have a pre-buff version of a ship that drops in value. Ship descriptions would have version info, along with their actual model-specific stats. 2. Add terrain. I'm not sure how exactly this would work in a wide open 3D space, but it would be very interesting tactically to have features like cover, high-ground, and narrow passes. Imagine a small group of 30 pilots who live in an area and know the terrain, know where to hide, where to ambush from - imagine a larger gang of 300 pilots looking to create conflict. Currently the group of 30 would have an extremely difficult time going toe-to-toe with the larger group, but with knowledge of the area can use tactics to harass and pick off targets and be highly mobile... 3. Make resource wealth dynamic. Add the equivalent to famines, floods, gold rushes, ecological collapses, overfishing, diseases, droughts, and earthquakes. A lot of real-world conflict is driven by big changes like these - imagine if a disaster in Deklein started a massive refugee migration. Or if an extremely valuable material was discovered in Fountain. And for the heck of it, some other ideas: 4. Get rid of TCUs. Get rid of iHUBs. Make the wealth of a system available to anybody who happens to be there. Therefore, a system is "owned" by a group simply by that group having a presence there and exploiting the system's resources and driving away other groups. The only difference between SOV null and NPC null is NPC null has NPC stations. 5. Give every ship in highsec that's fitted with modules or drones that can be used offensively a suspect timer. So mining ships and haulers still get CONCORD protection, but Catalysts and Nightmares don't. They have guns - they can protect themselves. CONCORD has other things to worry about, like Drifters. This would bring a lot of (much needed, IMO) combat to highsec, without disrupting industrial activities more than usual. Miners would have to arrange combat protection to deal with belt rats, unless they wanted to be suspects themselves. The main downside is that security missions would take a big hit. Not sure what to do about that one. Highsec Incursions taking a hit is, I think, generally a positive thing. 6. Adjust the relationship between ship speed, ship spacing and engagement range. Currently a thousand ships can occupy a very small volume of space, and in many ways, particularly with anchoring and F1-ing, act as a single much more powerful ship. Imagine if the game mechanics were adjusted such that those thousand ships had to be spread out over hundreds of kilometers? Fleet positioning would become much more important. Tank squads to the front, sniper wings at the rear, logistics spread out to cover as many as possible. Flanking maneuvers would become meaningful. Imagine if tank was split into six individually adjustable segments - fore, aft, starboard, port, upper, lower - such that a ship's heading becomes even more important. A lot of this this would be a hugely impactful change to how combat is done in EVE - for all I know it could ruin the game, I'm just brainstorming here so no flames, okay?
Kiandoshia Applied Anarchy ChaosTheory. 2403	Posted - 2016.01.23 16:26:55 - [148] - Quote 1) Dynamic distribution of resources (areas with tons of people in them become devoid of 'natural resources' (rocks, moon goo, rats, agent missions etc etc) after a time) CONCORD protection could be factored into this as well, though I guess it would be a huge mega project that would change the game quite significantly. 2) Collisions? I don't know what to call this exactly - by this I don't mean ramming that causes damage but stop letting us shoot through stations, asteroids, POS shields, titans, etc etc. 3) Bring back big explosions of torps and cruise missiles :D I'm not even joking, I don't want the silly huge shockwave explosions that torpedoes used to make but something that has a bit more oomph than what we have at the moment. That all I can think of now.
Hairtrigger Caldari Provisions Caldari State 44	Posted - 2016.01.23 16:32:49 - [149] - Quote 1. sack hilmar 2. sack hilmar 3.sack hilmar untill this tool is gone from eve for good its gonna keep going down hill with pay to win and other money grab ideas
Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy 698	Posted - 2016.01.23 23:18:29 - [150] - Quote focus on maintaining disparate types of play zones and avoid more rebalance. rethink selling skill points finally focus on additions to mining instead of just new UI and object looks... My posts here are going to evolve over time due to the fact that EVE is not static. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á- [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]

Iongduck Dong I Really Hate You Guys 2	Posted - 2016.01.23 23:54:51 - [151] - Quote Valacus wrote: 3) Find a solution for AFK cloaking. 15 min afk logout timer.
Kharnakh Vak'Atioth Dominion 52	Posted - 2016.01.24 00:06:31 - [152] - Quote 1. Dynamic PvE content, instead of the set waves and groups in missions / sites / anomalies, give the npc ships a 'points value' similar to an AT team. So one run through the group might be 5 BS, the next it might be 15 frigates... Would shake up ratting / mission running a bit. 2. WiS - This should never have been scrapped. Granted it caused a huge uproar at the time when all the hype just spluttered out the captains quarters, but the original plans and scope of this would have given Eve a social side its always needed outside the chatbox it's limited to now. And this - Kiandoshia wrote: 3) Bring back big explosions of torps and cruise missiles :D I'm not even joking, I don't want the silly huge shockwave explosions that torpedoes used to make but something that has a bit more oomph than what we have at the moment.
Trader20 Hedion University Amarr Empire 4	Posted - 2016.01.24 01:32:10 - [153] - Quote Iongduck Dong wrote: Valacus wrote: 3) Find a solution for AFK cloaking. 15 min afk logout timer. Would that include afk drone boats for missions or just cloaked? Don't really mind, just wondering.
Giand Amazone Knights of the Old Code 103	Posted - 2016.01.24 01:42:42 - [154] - Quote I would only change 1 thing .. Make from eve online, eve valkyrie, eve dust 514 and eve gunjack ... 1 game Look @ games like Elite Dangerouse and Star Citizen, you can do all above in those games and make eve loosing players. We are doing the same thing for 11 years now .. give us something new without having to buy 4 seperated games. Lead me, Follow me ......... or get the hell out of my way. CEO and Founder of [KOTOC] Knights of the old code
Tiddle Jr Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 714	Posted - 2016.01.24 01:49:09 - [155] - Quote Giand Amazone wrote: I would only change 1 thing .. Make from eve online, eve valkyrie, eve dust 514 and eve gunjack ... 1 . They don't have qualified devs for that or either their producers are stupid who thought that running 4 separate project within one world is damn right.
Trader20 Hedion University Amarr Empire 4	Posted - 2016.01.24 01:51:49 - [156] - Quote Giand Amazone wrote: I would only change 1 thing .. Make from eve online, eve valkyrie, eve dust 514 and eve gunjack ... 1 game Look @ games like Elite Dangerouse and Star Citizen, you can do all above in those games and make eve loosing players. We are doing the same thing for 11 years now .. give us something new without having to buy 4 seperated games. umm....sc isn't released yet so they can pretty much promise anything and not deliver. (must resist cult reference)
Assassin126 Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde 3	Posted - 2016.01.24 23:21:45 - [157] - Quote 1. Native Linux support 2. Expand PI - such as transfer items with other players on the planet. 3. Although I am not a miner, what happened to that exploration type mining that was suggested a while back? with much larger asteroid belts and some players would scan to find the more valuable rocks and broadcast it for the miners. Could fit in nicely in low sec too with the cov ops mining frigs tbh, and make low sec worth mining in.
IIshira School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 1325	Posted - 2016.01.25 00:04:23 - [158] - Quote Murauke wrote: Not sure about #2. I get it , it's an MMO meant to be played in groups, problem is if you look at the research of gamification it says that true engagement is achieved when everyone in the group feels they contributed to the task. The key word being group because "everyone in the solo" just doesn't have the same ring to it. Murauke wrote: A lot of the tasks in PVP are just "lock, f1, repeat" This is also true with the PVE content. I'm not saying it's never been more than that at it's core but there was more complexity added on. I think CCP is attempting to target some players from console gaming that are more used to rapidly pressing the same button and not capable of understanding complex systems. Murauke wrote: and whilst yes it is a MMO, the people more likely to provide content are the onces that prefer doing things solo. Why would solo players be more likely to provide content than ones that work with dozens of other players? I would think a whole bunch of players working together would be more capable than just a solo player. Maybe I'm just not understanding what you mean?
MalkePigen Cuckoo Bees 0	Posted - 2016.01.25 11:01:23 - [159] - Quote 1 Fix support (takes 4ever to get help and when help comes it sucks.. and is full of copy-pasta.) 2 Ban -10 sec alts in high sec (low sec and clone tags gets usefull) 3 Ganking is OP (too much money no training and no risk (that the player care about))
Eli Stan Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 382	Posted - 2016.01.26 20:13:52 - [160] - Quote Iongduck Dong wrote: Valacus wrote: 3) Find a solution for AFK cloaking. 15 min afk logout timer. "Searchlight" deployable. 2 minute deploy time. Cost similar to medium mobile warp disruption bubbles. Expires after 60 minutes. Two varieties: "Serarchlight Globe" that decloaks all ships within a 12 km radius of the deployable. "Searchlight Beam" that decloaks all ships within a 30-degree cone that's 60km long. Direction decided upon deployment based on player's camera angle and cannot be changed. Folks can still AFK cloak, which I'm fine with, but sensitive areas within a system that people are operating in can have put into place countermeasures against active cloakers.

AtramLolipop Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2016.01.29 17:01:30 - [161] - Quote I think the game has come to the end of it's life cycle for my gaming needs. I've played for 8 years nearly and in that time it's gone from being an incredible MMO to one that has become mundane. The current meta is for: Bring a frigate - we'll bring 2 Bring a logi - We'll bring 2 Bring a cruiser - we'll bring battlecruisers You get the idea, I just think there should be more differential between the tiers to ensure if this is the mentality of eve's loyal customers, more reward goes to those that seek out even battles. the n+1 mentality, fighting low risk battles and content should be long in the past of the game. Find a way to accomplish that and the game might just become interesting again. 1. take down KB's i think it indirectly causes people to not go out and experience the game or come up with a different way of showing a "leader board". 2. find ways to make the game more interesting in an arcade feel. e.g. kill 10 different pilots of different corps/alliances solo, now kill 30 solo. 3. just do something about Ewar- anything the mechanic is awful.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 2366	Posted - 2016.01.30 14:07:51 - [162] - Quote 1. Add an Emergency Repair Module (variants: shield, armour, structure). If total shield, armour and structure are reduced to zero in a single tick additional damage applied is collected and transformed into a 1:1 ratio repair. Capacitor is completely drained in the process. HP lost in tick must be 90% of total EHP. 2. Reconfigure null to have very deep wild pockets once again without stations or regional jumps that were added later and which made EvE tiny. 3. Complete and total removal of all remote modules. CCP Fozzie GÇ£We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGÇª in null sec anomalies. GÇ£* Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Erika Tsurpalen WiNGSPAN Academy for Enterprising Pilots The WINGSPAN Logo Alliance 17	Posted - 2016.01.30 14:46:25 - [163] - Quote 1. A rework of the criminal system. Right now, ganking is incredibly easy and the current punishment system is pitiful if the gank is successful (Which is 90% of the time). People say mining is the safest profession. Honestly, I think its ganking, you die, but you regain your ship + profits in loot, and who cares about sec status? People roll alts anyway. 2. Bounty hunting. While I personally have no idea how to fairly fix this, it sucks right now. Completely pointless. 3. WIS 4. Blow up alot of nullsec gates creating more pockets and pipes, allowing players to construct their own Gates instead when that comes around, so they can create their own networks, they should be destructable of course.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 87	Posted - 2016.02.02 00:57:16 - [164] - Quote Erika Tsurpalen wrote: 4. Blow up alot of nullsec gates creating more pockets and pipes, allowing players to construct their own Gates instead when that comes around, so they can create their own networks, they should be destructable of course. Make space smaller so people don't have to travel a long way and also make allow inhabitants to create ways in and ways out of their space. Like the idea.
Oshien Multiplex Gaming The Bastion 2	Posted - 2016.02.02 01:25:35 - [165] - Quote 1. Wardec system - This is basically legal ganking. Would put a cap on wardecs a corp/alliance could initiate. Probably something like 3 for a corp outside an alliance and 10 for an alliance. Make it to where you can't join an alliance when you are in a wardec that you initiated. Give every corp a sec status, decing a corp with a much higher sec status lowers your sec status (And all pilots in the corp), decing a corp with a much lower sec status raises your corp sec status. 2. High sec ganking - Concord should confiscate loot from kills in high sec where concord was summoned to the fight.(No loot for gankers) Basically not changing the ganking mechanics but making it not profitable to suicide gank in high sec space. 3. Mining - Hasn't changed since the beginning of Eve and is boring... would make it more interactive.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 87	Posted - 2016.02.02 07:11:34 - [166] - Quote Kinda looking at some of the other games coming out to do with space and I have to say their pvp looks a lot more "gaming" like. Like i've said for many years now pvp in Eve has become dull predictable and boring.
Iyokus Patrouette Empty Vessels 738	Posted - 2016.02.02 11:28:13 - [167] - Quote 1. Introduction of kick ass space pirate hats 2. moar variations of kick ass space pirate hats 3. A special kick ass space pirate hat just for me ---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----
Avvy Republic University Minmatar Republic 293	Posted - 2016.02.02 11:44:15 - [168] - Quote 2 main things, the first 1 being a game breaker imo. 1) Whatever CCP did to make the game download so quick, has resulted in this game running hotter than other MMOs, where in the past it was one of the cooler running ones. Yet in-game the game doesn't look any different. 2) The attribute system Remove the attribute system as all it really does is lock you into training in relation to the main attributes set and reduces your choice of what you want to train and when you want to train it. But my account runs out Sunday and although I was considering staying, point 1 above has made me decide that I really shouldn't. Although if I had of stayed I'd still try to get rid of the attribute system, as it's such a crap system. Especially to those that like to do things when they do, more efficiently. So I'll just wish you all well. Might be back in the future, but not if point 1 remains an issue.
Lathael Inner Ring Conglomerate 17	Posted - 2016.02.02 17:21:50 - [169] - Quote 1. Remove learning implants. Maybe different attributes as a whole. It gives no benefit for gameplay and hinders some skill affine persons to enjoy the game. Was the greatest archievement in dust514 to have a skill system without those damn attributes. 2. Introduce more walking in stations. Great opportunity to catch more people, increase income for ccp without touching existing gameplay. HURRAY! Think of better quarters for real money, trophys in sites you can put in your room et cetera. 3. Don't know.
Divine Entervention Bridge Four 813	Posted - 2016.02.02 19:27:28 - [170] - Quote Remove kill mails Make null sec local chat population list only visible to the space's sovereignty owners. Make it something that can be disabled via entosis link so the inhabitants of that space can no longer see who is in local. Also make a module that will let ships "listen" to local, gaining access to the population list and seeing what's being said in it. Remove the hard cap of 250km on targeting and damage application.

Jacques d'Orleans The Scope Gallente Federation 2580	Posted - 2016.02.02 19:53:16 - [171] - Quote Divine Entervention wrote: Remove kill mails May I ask why?
Divine Entervention Bridge Four 814	Posted - 2016.02.02 22:16:49 - [172] - Quote You can ask anything you want.
Warlord Balrog 303rd X-SOLDIER 1	Posted - 2016.02.03 12:22:10 - [173] - Quote Otso Bakarti wrote: I've said this for years, and a thin minority manages to shout it down, though the majority really wants it: 1.) Make piracy a crime against the sovereignty where it occurs. 2.) Make the pirate(s) criminals with that sovereignty in all its systems. 3.) Make the punishment fit the crime; hefty/hurtful fines, banishment from said sovereignty's systems till it's paid. Make the back story, the underlying characters and events MEANINGFUL by bringing them into the IMMERSION in a real and meaningful way. Discourage penny ante fly by night vandals from trashing the game with pedestrian and tawdry antics. Make racial sovereignty REAL. PS "Risk averse" is a slogan invented by the minority PvP-ers hoping it will force management to turn EVE (and other games, as well) into a strictly PvP game, even though these people comprise 20% (or so) of video gamers worldwide (www). When you see "risk averse" in a post, remember it's there to obfuscate and confuse, because the people who use it know they can't win by just being honest with their intentions and ambitions. So, they're resorting to a con job. So more like real life in the sense that once you've been in jail you're flagged for life? Even after you pay the fine you still have a medal showing whom your crimes were against. Wouldn't mind seeing Concord be weary when you enter system and follow you to make you behave in it's spaces too. "If you can't do the time, don't do the crime" sort of way.
Callahan Rahistafari COPIER GLOBAL HYPER MEGANET 0	Posted - 2016.02.03 14:00:18 - [174] - Quote I would like to see some less serious things . 1, A grand theft auto style set of radio stations including madcap chat shows. 2, Tagging drones so you can graffiti a titan or station or a gate or what you want the scope for fun is huge. 3 Corpse launcher that splatters the corpse when hitting the target viewable when you look at target and fire. These are just my ideas for a little fun.
Vasili Zaitsez Eldorado Exhumers Darwinism. 1	Posted - 2016.02.03 16:39:44 - [175] - Quote PVP, PvE, risk averse, risk intensive. Sounds like we would like to pick our fights and play styles. Also sounds like you are being "encouraged" to change your game through game evolution and or what other players do. I too would like to choose how I play and not be required to engage in play styles I did not select. PvPers predominantly get to choose where when they PVP. There are of course some exceptions such as Concorde and Incursions. PvE players initially get to choose what they do. However, that can end abruptly should a PVP player show up and decide for the PvE player that they will now be doing PvP. There are mechanisms in use that provide some element of control. PvE Missions for example restrict ship types. Here are some game add in/changes that may provide more options Add in 1: A variety of PVP missions with specific parameters. Add in 2: Additional Environments, Spec'd out Arenas for open PvP like Alliance Tournament Add in 3: Dedicated Co-Op PvE environment These areas would be transited to/from main game environment same as Wormholes High Sec etc. Existing game environment would still interact with new environments at the transition points. Since these are add in ideas the existing EvE environment would be unaffected.
Jacques d'Orleans The Scope Gallente Federation 2580	Posted - 2016.02.03 17:12:28 - [176] - Quote Divine Entervention wrote: You can ask anything you want. Yup, i know that, new question is, are you just to thick to answer?
Divine Entervention Bridge Four 814	Posted - 2016.02.03 17:50:20 - [177] - Quote Jacques d'Orleans wrote: Divine Entervention wrote: You can ask anything you want. Yup, i know that, new question is, are you just to thick to answer? Inferior grammar skills. Hostile intent. Request denied.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 87	Posted - 2016.02.04 00:04:39 - [178] - Quote There's nothing more frustrating then committing to a fight based on what you see and then being blobbed and not being able to do a thing about it. It such a **** way to play the game and it make awful game play.
Inquisiteur Karamasov Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2016.02.04 02:49:00 - [179] - Quote 1: Toxic pvp player 2: pvp player who clain eve online is only a pvp game 3: pvp player who force you to play pvp when you don't want And i will add a last one : old player alliance who don't want the game evolve
Mollie Madullier Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2016.02.04 03:28:49 - [180] - Quote 1) Lock criminals out of HS. Simply calibrate the gates based on sec status. 2) Allow open discussion in the forums. Do we really need such moderation? 3) Improve customer service. CCP has almost zero.

Barrogh Habalu Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 1096	Posted - 2016.02.04 08:02:30 - [181] - Quote Vasili Zaitsez wrote: Since these are add in ideas the existing EvE environment would be unaffected. That's not really the case. If you offer people distilled content, nobody will go for one consisting of trade-offs. And since the latter only works when manned, well... Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Daemun Khanid Apollo Defence Industries 277	Posted - 2016.02.04 08:06:02 - [182] - Quote Came to say something snarky, had to run grab my tear bucket after seeing the content of this thread. So much sadness to savor and so little time. Daemun of Khanid
StuRyan Death By Design Did he say Jump 94	Posted - 2016.02.04 10:51:24 - [183] - Quote Daemun Khanid wrote: Came to say something snarky, had to run grab my tear bucket after seeing the content of this thread. So much sadness to savor and so little time. Entertaining - Yes, but actually reading the thread it covers some standout points that make playing the game painful.
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode ISD Community Communications Liaisons 6914	Posted - 2016.02.04 19:34:05 - [184] - Quote Mollie Madullier wrote: 1) Lock criminals out of HS. Simply calibrate the gates based on sec status. 2) Allow open discussion in the forums. Do we really need such moderation? 3) Improve customer service. CCP has almost zero. There's no need for moderation if you follow the rules. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Vice Admiral Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department
stg slate Caldari Provisions Caldari State 22	Posted - 2016.02.04 19:51:25 - [185] - Quote ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote: There's no need for moderation if you follow the rules. But that's no fun
Mollie Madullier Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2016.02.04 20:01:48 - [186] - Quote ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote: Mollie Madullier wrote: 1) Lock criminals out of HS. Simply calibrate the gates based on sec status. 2) Allow open discussion in the forums. Do we really need such moderation? 3) Improve customer service. CCP has almost zero. There's no need for moderation if you follow the rules. You didn't read #2 sir. Quote: 2) Allow open discussion in the forums. Do we really need such moderation? I believe in rules, I really do. But do these forums need to be so restrictive? Sure, no rl violence and racism, stuff like that, but a little freedom of speech would be nice.
Joel Vaille 14th Legion The Bloc 2	Posted - 2016.02.04 21:56:09 - [187] - Quote 1. tidi being greatly reduced. have never been in a tidi fight but it sounds terrible. more of a technology problem that might not be solvable for many many years. 2. pvp being more profitable. hate all this nonsense about having to have alts pay for your pvp account. 3. less gate campers. i have only gotten caught in camps a very few times only losing rookie ships but still this is what some people do 90% of the time. i constantly hear "were at war with this alliance so dont go through this gate" because all some people do is play the game to gate camp. like how is that fun? if it were more like "were at war with these people so be careful because they might cyno in a fleet" that would be cool. we never get any more targets when were at war with people. no roaming around where they live looking for solo fights or anything. maybe its just a problem for low sec people going into high sec but its just kinda boring.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 2368	Posted - 2016.02.04 23:17:46 - [188] - Quote ISD Dorrim Barstorlode wrote: Mollie Madullier wrote: 1) Lock criminals out of HS. Simply calibrate the gates based on sec status. 2) Allow open discussion in the forums. Do we really need such moderation? 3) Improve customer service. CCP has almost zero. There's no need for moderation if you follow the rules. Pretty sure that's what he meant. Part of our sub is access to the forums based on the rules. We should get what we pay for. CCP Fozzie GÇ£We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGÇª in null sec anomalies. GÇ£* Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Barron Hammerstrike RISK Inc. 41	Posted - 2016.02.04 23:19:24 - [189] - Quote I'd like to still see my ship when jumping through a gate. The (not so)new animation takes me out of the game when my ship suddenly vanishes on jumps. Although a little better than before the bounty system could stand to be improved. Players with active bounties should be able to be located by any agent wherever thy are for example. On another note -- if walking in stations was a thing the bounty system could be really awesome as a way to add pvp to that concept. A cleaner un-docking process where the ships aren't colliding with each other.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 2368	Posted - 2016.02.05 01:20:27 - [190] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Mithandra wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Nope, incursions and level 4 missions are much better than null sov income which earns around the same as highsec level 3 missions. All in the sig CCP Fozzie GÇ£We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGÇª in null sec anomalies. GÇ£* Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 88	Posted - 2016.02.05 10:36:45 - [191] - Quote Infinity Ziona wrote: baltec1 wrote: Mithandra wrote: baltec1 wrote: 1 deal with logi N+1 2. Revamp PVE rewards from the ground up in all areas of space to reward those who take on more risk and effort. Currently the best rewards are in the safest space. 3. Nerf T3 cruisers and destroyers into their respective classes. Best rewards are in Nullsec space, which yep, does mean best rewards are in "safe" space currently Nope, incursions and level 4 missions are much better than null sov income which earns around the same as highsec level 3 missions. All in the sig No - we are not turning this thread into a discussion about null sec vs low sec vs high sec, Risk vs Reward BS.
Ivory Harcourt Space Ants Tactical Narcotics Team 10	Posted - 2016.02.05 12:31:51 - [192] - Quote I want to change 1) Opportunities - replace with the real tutorial 2) Career Agents - care to ******* update them? 3) Nullsec Sov - give us a reason to have it?
Reluctant Deity 8	Posted - 2016.02.05 17:16:28 - [193] - Quote At least bring back the criteria that a pilot has to have bad sec status before you can place a bounty on him/her. Perhaps have another mechanic for placing a "hit" on someone. Bounty: an amount of money given to someone as a reward for catching a criminal To put a big red, "WANTED" on someone implies that they've committed a criminal act. ~A very small group of players drown out the voice of the masses~
Avvy Republic University Minmatar Republic 293	Posted - 2016.02.06 14:43:04 - [194] - Quote Reluctant Deity wrote: At least bring back the criteria that a pilot has to have bad sec status before you can place a bounty on him/her. Perhaps have another mechanic for placing a "hit" on someone. Bounty: an amount of money given to someone as a reward for catching a criminal To put a big red, "WANTED" on someone implies that they've committed a criminal act. Agree with you, the bounty system should only be used on criminals. If someone whats to target a none criminal, they can still do so with other means, as a lot do now.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 26844	Posted - 2016.02.06 14:51:18 - [195] - Quote Infinity Ziona wrote: All in the sig GÇªwhich doesn't really contradict what he said. Anyway: 1. Highsec earning potential. 2. Highsec safety and protection levels. 3. Ease of movement. GÇªall of which need to be lowered. Make it far more profitable to move from earning spot to earning spot, but also proportionally more risky to expose yourself to that kind of travel. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.3 - Vanguard Edition.
Avvy Republic University Minmatar Republic 293	Posted - 2016.02.06 14:59:15 - [196] - Quote Tippia wrote: Infinity Ziona wrote: All in the sig GÇªwhich doesn't really contradict what he said. Anyway: 1. Highsec earning potential. 2. Highsec safety and protection levels. 3. Ease of movement. GÇªall of which need to be lowered. Make it far more profitable to move from earning spot to earning spot, but also proportionally more risky to expose yourself to that kind of travel. Moving more wealth at more risk. That makes it more profitable and easier for the gankers, but who else does it create fun for?
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 26844	Posted - 2016.02.06 15:26:10 - [197] - Quote Avvy wrote: Moving more wealth at more risk. That makes it more profitable and easier for the gankers, but who else does it create fun for? The ones who move stuff around. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.3 - Vanguard Edition.
Nana Skalski Poseidaon 4745	Posted - 2016.02.06 15:38:46 - [198] - Quote More deadspace modules, more harder missions, more DED complexes. I know there is a lot of them, but they are good and I would like to see more goodness. Also, the fourth thing, other use for items we can sell to NPC. Like Overseer effects packages with chance of blueprint or other stuff when opened. ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ =ƒÅ¦ - my sandcastle Every part of a game helps to tell a story. =ƒôò
Epic Name The Lost. SpaceMonkey's Alliance 149	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:29:31 - [199] - Quote 1) I'd remove attribute implants and make one training speed. 2) I'd allow players to freely train up to 3 characters at one time. 3) Add the ability to completely remove unwanted skills. I think that if these changes were made every single person that I ever knew who played Eve and left would come back.
Captain Campion Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North 4	Posted - 2016.02.07 20:54:34 - [200] - Quote 1. Refocus Amarr on lasers - drones/missiles is just getting weird. 2. Up the quantity and quality of rats everywhere. Peeps who don't want cap fights should be able to rat. 3. Add some 0.0 space where caps can't go (not wormhole space). 4. Stop gate camping

J'Poll Perkone Caldari State 6293	Posted - 2016.02.07 21:16:38 - [201] - Quote 1. Remove Concord. 2. Ban all carebears (as in people who are 200% against any form of PvP possibility) 3. Remove high-sec. Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
Yuan Li Ishida Ishida Warframe And Weapon Systems Ltd 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:01:35 - [202] - Quote 3 things I would like to see: 1) U.I. Redesign like EVE Vegas 2013 UI from (EVE Vegas 2013) w/ toggle option to keep current U.I. for the old bittervets/players who hate change. 2) Eliminate TIDI 3) Ability to create characters from pirate factions.
Ashterothi Aideron Robotics 347	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:08:54 - [203] - Quote 1) A complete revamp of the UI for one unified idea and intuitive information for the users in all activities. 2) A redo of the Pirate factions so that each have a unique way to gain reputation, esteem, and enemies, as well as allow players to hunt other players rating against allied pirates. 3) Leverage the Dust-on-PC development effort to give us a fleshed out WiS experience including soft-clone based exploration sites. Listen to Hydrostatic Podcast for all your Empyrean needs!
Ashterothi Aideron Robotics 347	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:09:57 - [204] - Quote I promise I didn't peek at your answers @Yuan Li Ishida Listen to Hydrostatic Podcast for all your Empyrean needs!
Yuan Li Ishida Ishida Warframe And Weapon Systems Ltd 1	Posted - 2016.02.08 05:21:10 - [205] - Quote @Ashterothi No harm, no foul. I'm just glad other players want to see similar changes :)
Aldran Gentlharp I Maicar Mordo Invictum. 5	Posted - 2016.02.08 18:50:34 - [206] - Quote I would change only one thing. If you own a System but don't use it the system should cost you 2,5 billion per Week and for every index point in Military and Industry lower the cost by 250m. The the Overlords now have to Pay for holding a unused System and if they drop the sov smaller Alliances feel encouraged to claim sov by themselve instead of renting Systems.
tiberiusric Comply Or Die 212	Posted - 2016.02.08 18:51:35 - [207] - Quote ccp thats it
Danetta Valens Phayder Research 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:00:04 - [208] - Quote 1. Rework all the old missions to the level of quality of new burner missions. Competent preparation and competent destruction of small number of ships is better than "lock-shoot-lock-shoot-repeat_100_times". Make missions less grindy by increasing both difficulty and rewards. 2. FW. It's probably already in work, but still need to say. Probably, the first solution GÇö auto-suspect on entering FW-plex. Maybe something more, but at least this. 3. Another overhaul of some interface windows. Trading window is awful. We probably always will have these delays, but at least number of clicks shouldbe reduced. Also, various context menus. Why can I press "compare" module in fitting window, but can't go direct to "market details"? Instead I have to click "show info", then I can press "market details". It may sounds like minor things, but after a lot of time it become suffer.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 88	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:31:28 - [209] - Quote Captain Campion wrote: 1. Refocus Amarr on lasers - drones/missiles is just getting weird. 2. Up the quantity and quality of rats everywhere. Peeps who don't want cap fights should be able to rat. 3. Add some 0.0 space where caps can't go (not wormhole space). 4. Stop gate camping I like your last 2. Thread is going way off topic and starting to get into the argument about risk vs reward and earning potential. It's BS people talk about HS being safe. The game in general should be attractive no matter where you play the game and it shouldn't matter what your RL barriers are, it shouldn't stop you from being able to play the game. The problem is null sec paints a picture of viscous battles, a fight for supremacy, and a completely immersive world. When you get out there it's gate camps, blue balling and a game play focused around plexing, "because somehow attractive systems will be give more dynamic gameplay". What sucks more than anything is the state of PVP/combat. This is what the thread is focusing on. As stated, the game went from "having fun" to being "dull boring and predictable" with gate camps, logi, and EWAR. Many moons ago it things like EWAR were brought in because "you have to make the right choice or pay the consequence" i can live with that but I feel the game has changed so much over the years that it's forced people into making a contentless game unless you have sufficient more numbers, logi or ewar. It's killed small/solo gang pvp which i consider to be very important in a game that relies so many other factors coming together at once to create a interesting content full game.
Danetta Valens Phayder Research 0	Posted - 2016.02.08 19:57:34 - [210] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: It's killed small/solo gang pvp Future without Off-Grid Boosters is the worst.

Dirk Magnum KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 527	Posted - 2016.02.09 03:29:19 - [211] - Quote 1) no alts 2) no plex 3) no bullshit Step into the ring with The Madness, brother. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE." - traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed]
Conrad Makbure Trident Expedition 79	Posted - 2016.02.09 04:08:50 - [212] - Quote iforumizer Hamabu wrote: 1. undocking at 15km. 2. Cleaner UI. EVE is pretty, but the action is often burried behind too many windows 3. WIS With respect to the quoted.. 1) why stop with station undocking distances, and increase undock to 300 km. Gates have been a choke point for years now, change that. Open up the bottle necks in this game a lot more with something else. 2) work on more solo content so if people don't want to join a large corp or alliance they don't have to. There are a lot of solo corporations because people don't want to go with the old model....go solo, join corp, pay taxes, become cog in alliance. 3) make stations more of a home so we can get out of the NPC stations, make it more attainable for all who play, not just corporations/alliance.
AtramLolipop Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 12	Posted - 2016.02.09 16:15:00 - [213] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: Captain Campion wrote: 1. Refocus Amarr on lasers - drones/missiles is just getting weird. 2. Up the quantity and quality of rats everywhere. Peeps who don't want cap fights should be able to rat. 3. Add some 0.0 space where caps can't go (not wormhole space). 4. Stop gate camping I like your last 2. Thread is going way off topic and starting to get into the argument about risk vs reward and earning potential. It's BS people talk about HS being safe. The game in general should be attractive no matter where you play the game and it shouldn't matter what your RL barriers are, it shouldn't stop you from being able to play the game. The problem is null sec paints a picture of viscous battles, a fight for supremacy, and a completely immersive world. When you get out there it's gate camps, blue balling and a game play focused around plexing, "because somehow attractive systems will be give more dynamic gameplay". What sucks more than anything is the state of PVP/combat. This is what the thread is focusing on. As stated, the game went from "having fun" to being "dull boring and predictable" with gate camps, logi, and EWAR. Many moons ago it things like EWAR were brought in because "you have to make the right choice or pay the consequence" i can live with that but I feel the game has changed so much over the years that it's forced people into making a contentless game unless you have sufficient more numbers, logi or ewar. It's killed small/solo gang pvp which i consider to be very important in a game that relies so many other factors coming together at once to create a interesting content full game. Agreed - as you rightly put a lot of the mechanics in the game have made the game "contentless". All I've done for the past 4 weeks is run into remote sensor boosted Svipuls gate camping low sec. It's making the game awful to play!
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 409	Posted - 2016.02.09 16:41:29 - [214] - Quote 1) The new player experience: - Don't get dropped in space in the beginning and lose your ship. Capsuleers should figure on their own how to undock, and learn by mistakes. 2) The new player experience: - oh so many tiny text boxes with tiny sentences, and absolutely no voice overs. 3) The new player experience: - You have warped to a stargate, here have an achievement, you have right clicked in space here have an achievement, etc, etc Regards, a Freelancer Eve online is : A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online D) CCP Games pay More to win at skill training time, now with instant gratification http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg
Abda Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2016.02.09 17:37:54 - [215] - Quote Remove ALL ore belts. Increase maximum anom spawn rate a bit to compensate. No more belt ratting, no more camping one system for all your RNG needs for mining and bounties. Forces people to move around the constellation at lest. Security status lower than -8 give GCC at all times in empire space. (Concord shouldn't be ********, its obvious at this point, you are up to no good!) Add a 'spool up' time to entering warp that starts when the 'Warp" button is pressed. (Those drives need time to warm up, even if you are perfectly aligned and up to speed already) Alignment and speed requirements must still be satisfied. Meaning aligning and ratting in your carrier or other ratting ship, while smart, isn't a great solution all the time. Doesn't even have to be long
Daemun Khanid Apollo Defence Industries 293	Posted - 2016.02.09 18:29:42 - [216] - Quote 1. UI dev team 2. eve store marketing staff 3. various other CCP upper level decision making staff Daemun of Khanid
Snowmann Arrow Industries 43	Posted - 2016.02.09 19:41:01 - [217] - Quote I got one for you... 1- Remove all Supercapitals and then rebalance each of them ; then only allow 1 of each to be in existence at anytime 2- Rebalance all ships and skills to lower influence of all skills. ( 1-2% per level instead of 5% etc ) 3- Remove all indestructible assets from game such as Outposts; and rebalance Sov/Null with removal of Supercaps. 3b- Several QOF enhancements....; and make space seem Bigger. Then reset entire game to Day One (With the exception to any character information / Corps / Alliances ) so players start with current total SP but unallocated, and a certain amount of isk depending on several factors to allow them to essentially get started on their new life in New Eden. Players with over 15mil SP should have enough starting ISK to be able to get most skills they want and good set of doctrine ships with plenty ISK left over. Players with more SP should have an easier time, but shouldn't scale anything close directly proportional to SP total. The Why the Hell??? -SuperCaps should have never been allowed to get to the current numbers. -Skills should have even less impact than they do now in order to address the too late to get in game issue. (Trying to convince new players of it being a non issue will only get harder as time goes on ) -Null Sec Sov should be more dynamic by allowing "Scorched Earth" gameplay. Moon Goo should have never been introduced in a way that allowed it to be easily controlled by the very few. -Someone should be able to move their assets from deep space at a extremely slow speed by NPC means if they or their group get booted. More players will be willing to take the risk then since RL can intervene at the worst and unexpected times, because they aren't forced to fire sale. More than are now willing. That is, to increase the number of people willing to try out Null, because they can still get their stuff out of deep null if they suddenly get too busy and their group got booted from where it was. And it should take a lot longer to get around each solar system, and a bit longer to cross the New Eden cluster. Reduce warp speeds, but move all the gates vastly closer together within each solar system very near to the star. Add a lot more content to each solar system in order to allow for even greater player density per solar system. Yes, these changes are drastic. I feel the only way they can be done is by a server reset. Taking everyone's Titan away and then trying to find a way to compensate them is just too difficult to do. Finding a way to make the game seem new again to the many who have gained so much ISK that it has destroyed their fun in it seems so fleeting. The train seems to have already left the station for many who have interest but have never tried Eve. Too many have said they have thought about trying out Null Sec but it seems to take too much of a time commitment and if you are forced to take an extended break due to RL, you can frequently become **** out of Luck. That may be appealing to the "Hard Core" but it can significantly limit the numbers you can get. Random Guy... "Hey dude, that was more than three.." Me... "Not Really" 1-We should correct many past game design errors and issues. (including the very hard to decide to do) 2-We should make the game and especially some aspects of it more appealing and more accessible. 3-We should re-shuffle, re-cut, and re-deal the deck. (Significant but not total Reset) ...as in a refreshing new start for all, but with a much better framework to work with. A partial Reset could be accepted by most, depending on how it was done, and why. A full Reset will never be accepted by most of those who have spent significant real time and money on this game. For many (but not all), the fun of a game ends when you have more money than you could ever reasonably need, and have very little to look forward to. Given the more Vets that get to that point, and the further the "Train has left the Station" for those who have yet to try; The sooner the end of this game will be. Sometimes a reset is needed, even in a MMO. The longer we go without fixing some of the worse game design shortsights, the less likely this game will have a bright future. But who knows, maybe another game like Star Citizen will get it right, and many of us will just continue the experience there instead....
Totalrx NA No Assholes 122	Posted - 2016.02.09 20:32:09 - [218] - Quote Snowmann wrote: I got one for you... A partial Reset could be accepted by most, depending on how it was done, and why. A full Reset will never be accepted by most of those who have spent significant real time and money on this game. For many (but not all), the fun of a game ends when you have more money than you could ever reasonably need, and have very little to look forward to. Given the more Vets that get to that point, and the further the "Train has left the Station" for those who have yet to try; The sooner the end of this game will be. Sometimes a reset is needed, even in a MMO. The longer we go without fixing some of the worse game design shortsights, the less likely this game will have a bright future. But who knows, maybe another game like Star Citizen will get it right, and many of us will just continue the experience there instead.... I've often said that a full reset would be a great idea. Everyone training from square one, the mad scramble to get footholds in sov, being the first to hold down a WH POS, etc etc That being said, as much as a marketing tool as "Everyone starts from Step 1" would be to possibly bring in new players. I don't think the mass exodus of vets would really make the financials jump. I could be wrong. Maybe vets would actually enjoy the reset. New alliances, new corp infiltrations, new drama, etc etc Maybe though, a Mini-Eden server would be a better option? A verse people could go to for that fresh start without having the fanancial strain on CCP that the New Eden cluster has. If it started out popularizing New Eden, then they could merge tham. There's no easy answer on how to make the game feel new again for the vets while giving new players the feeling that they can not only catch up, but also succeed in their own perception of success. I can say that getting rid of High Sec & Concord will only drain the game of paying customers. No new player would join when another player in a Tech II shiney ship would blow them up as soon as they jumped their first gate. One by one, people would quit the game for real life reasons, boredom, etc and the whole thing would fold.
Beinon Starkiller Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.02.10 10:03:25 - [219] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Three things? 1- There is no way in which PvE players can generate content, becoming enablers or instigators, through means of PvE. That is killing EVE so it would be nice to change it. 2- Stop adding content that can only be used and exploited by PvP veterans with experience and friends. Add content that can be learned, enjoyed and mastered from scratch, on your own, and even without firing a single shot. Refer to point 1. 3- Expand EVE gameplay so it is about much more than spaceships and pew pew. Add avatar gameplay and NPC interaction in stations and on planets, develop means to political intrigue, economic warfare and other non-military conflict. Refer to points 1 and 2. For what is worth... 1. Nailed it, What got me into eve all those years ago was the lore and the tension between the factions, I enjoyed mission running for awhile thinking I was helping the faction......but never really felt like I'd achieved something I still can't believe it's been this long and we still don't have some sort of out of ship social hub Agree, make non pvp things exciting and more meaningfull 2. Agree with all the people mentioning the stupid combat linking that goes on, it's too much of an advantage for such little risk. Make a linked ship have to be with the ship its linking to. 3. Establish diminishing returns on logi fleets
Beinon Starkiller Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2016.02.10 10:07:54 - [220] - Quote 1. Add more incentive to 1 on 1 in pvp in Null sec and FW, reward pvpers more ISK/LP for fighting a frigate say with a frigate instead of all the alpha that goes on. They did this in other MMO's to good affect. 2. Fix T3 Destroyers, they are crazy unbalanced 3. Overhaul high sec mission running with new stories/better rewards etc

Eurydia Vespasian Storm Hunters 18704	Posted - 2016.02.10 17:28:50 - [221] - Quote 1. Make the game fun. We'll talk about 2 and 3 afterwards.
Infinity Ziona Cloakers 2382	Posted - 2016.02.10 23:15:03 - [222] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: Captain Campion wrote: 1. Refocus Amarr on lasers - drones/missiles is just getting weird. 2. Up the quantity and quality of rats everywhere. Peeps who don't want cap fights should be able to rat. 3. Add some 0.0 space where caps can't go (not wormhole space). 4. Stop gate camping I like your last 2. Thread is going way off topic and starting to get into the argument about risk vs reward and earning potential. It's BS people talk about HS being safe. The game in general should be attractive no matter where you play the game and it shouldn't matter what your RL barriers are, it shouldn't stop you from being able to play the game. The problem is null sec paints a picture of viscous battles, a fight for supremacy, and a completely immersive world. When you get out there it's gate camps, blue balling and a game play focused around plexing, "because somehow attractive systems will be give more dynamic gameplay". What sucks more than anything is the state of PVP/combat. This is what the thread is focusing on. As stated, the game went from "having fun" to being "dull boring and predictable" with gate camps, logi, and EWAR. Many moons ago it things like EWAR were brought in because "you have to make the right choice or pay the consequence" i can live with that but I feel the game has changed so much over the years that it's forced people into making a contentless game unless you have sufficient more numbers, logi or ewar. It's killed small/solo gang pvp which i consider to be very important in a game that relies so many other factors coming together at once to create a interesting content full game. battles in null are very viscous, like swimming through cement. 1 Gatecamps. The problem with gatecamps is a legacy issue. They havent really been changed since launch where your tackle consisted of a frig, no bubbles, no interdictors, no RSB's etc. That worked okay with a spawn range of 15km. With tackle now being capable of extremely long range spawn range needs to be adjusted. CCP Fozzie GÇ£We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGÇª in null sec anomalies. GÇ£* Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Ibutho Inkosi Irubo Kovu 111	Posted - 2016.02.11 08:05:46 - [223] - Quote When I started today the basketball goal was ten feet off the ground. Now, it's just a foot and a half and I can look straight down the pipe without jumping! (I thought I'd never be able to slam dunk!) Now that you ask....I'd dump this idiotic skill point idea. Shows you how unrealistic a guy can be, no? As long as the tale of the hunt is told by the hunter, and not the lion, it will favor the hunter.
Alexei Stryker Steiners Erben 95	Posted - 2016.02.11 14:45:41 - [224] - Quote 1) Sexy women clothings 2) More sexy women clothings 3) Wanking in station Ideas: Right click context menu on char -> custom entries Minimize the docking game
ISD Max Trix ISD Community Communications Liaisons 148	Posted - 2016.02.11 18:29:18 - [225] - Quote Quote: 34. Posting of inappopriate content is prohibited. The posting of pornography, discriminatory remarks which are sexually explicit, harmful, threatening, abusive, defamatory, obscene, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive as well as excessive obscene or vulgar language, posts which discuss or illustrate illegal activity, or an instance of providing links to sites that contain any of the aforementioned is strictly prohibited on the EVE Online forums. Removed a post. ISD Max Trix Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department *I do not respond to Evemails.*
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 96	Posted - 2016.02.16 00:53:09 - [226] - Quote Grind to go out and enjoy the game and out whit people. Goes through 4 gate camps in 30 minutes all of which have sensor boosted Svipuls.... YAWN.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 96	Posted - 2016.02.22 23:32:24 - [227] - Quote Cyno Nereus now for solo pvp seriously ?
Nana Skalski Poseidaon 5611	Posted - 2016.02.22 23:45:37 - [228] - Quote Make Space Pope a thing in the game. He should reign with full power. Blessed would receive a buff to SP and ISK bounty aquisition. ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°)/ =ƒÅ¦ - my sandcastle Every part of a game helps to tell a story. =ƒôò
Rosov Aulmais Fuxi Legion Fraternity. 0	Posted - 2016.02.23 11:41:57 - [229] - Quote Add Valkyries and Vespas to the drop tables.
Brokk Witgenstein Extreme Agony The Wraithguard. 187	Posted - 2016.02.24 05:12:40 - [230] - Quote 1. remove cyno/warp limitations on complexes - and preferably, don't overuse those goddamn acceleration gates. 2. delay local to allow for some actual hunting instead of everybody simply POSsing up by the time you load grid. 3. make T3 cruisers choose between nullified or cloaked. Both is ridiculous. (can I add another few points?) 4. get rid of Territorial Claim units. Whoever "uses" the system more apparently holds it; and whoever wants to put structures up (POSses, POCOs, Citadels, Outposts, ...) can freely do so. Keeping them, of course, might be the tricky part. 5. Factional Warfare beacons. Absolutely ridiculous: scram, dual web - case closed. Could we perhaps land on grid at a random spot like 12km off the goddamn beacon? 6. Tone the Navy down, but make people with sec status between -2 -- -5 valid prey for players. Ideally allowing a career as bounty hunter (perhaps by affiliating your corp with Concord's blessing as a freelance bounty hunter agency?) would encourage highsecbears to take up pro-active roles in empire security. (some more??) 7. Fix that darned Bellicose alright. Give it a hefty CPU/PG/speed/agility/capacitor bonus, half the price, I don't know -- but for the love of Bob give it some love! 8. dropping from a wardecced corp ought to cost a fee, payable to the wardeccers. In the same vein, staying in an NPC corp past your first 30 days in-game ought to cost a renewal fee. You want the added protection? You got to pay for it, or be dropped entirely OUT of any corp and relinquish your right to CONCORD intervention.

lilol' me Retribution Holdings Corp Retribution. 58	Posted - 2016.02.24 17:17:31 - [231] - Quote Hilmar, fozzie and Seagull... and perhaps falcon
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 96	Posted - 2016.02.25 00:48:27 - [232] - Quote Brokk Witgenstein wrote: 1. remove cyno/warp limitations on complexes - and preferably, don't overuse those goddamn acceleration gates. 2. delay local to allow for some actual hunting instead of everybody simply POSsing up by the time you load grid. 3. make T3 cruisers choose between nullified or cloaked. Both is ridiculous. (can I add another few points?) 4. get rid of Territorial Claim units. Whoever "uses" the system more apparently holds it; and whoever wants to put structures up (POSses, POCOs, Citadels, Outposts, ...) can freely do so. Keeping them, of course, might be the tricky part. 5. Factional Warfare beacons. Absolutely ridiculous: scram, dual web - case closed. Could we perhaps land on grid at a random spot like 12km off the goddamn beacon? 6. Tone the Navy down, but make people with sec status between -2 -- -5 valid prey for players. Ideally allowing a career as bounty hunter (perhaps by affiliating your corp with Concord's blessing as a freelance bounty hunter agency?) would encourage highsecbears to take up pro-active roles in empire security. (some more??) 7. Fix that darned Bellicose alright. Give it a hefty CPU/PG/speed/agility/capacitor bonus, half the price, I don't know -- but for the love of Bob give it some love! 8. dropping from a wardecced corp ought to cost a fee, payable to the wardeccers. In the same vein, staying in an NPC corp past your first 30 days in-game ought to cost a renewal fee. You want the added protection? You got to pay for it, or be dropped entirely OUT of any corp and relinquish your right to CONCORD intervention. Edit: And 9, yes, boosting only within a 250km radius please. How can you help people fly faster or tackle faster if you're nowhere near and can't see bubkes?? Not hating on boosters; but if there's two people attacking me I want to see two people. Not one and the holy father who arth in heaven. Thank you for considering my whine. I'll take my Stilton now - bye! Nice post agree with it all. I would like to see cyno mechanic updated/changed, i mean cyno industrial ships are awful.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.02.27 00:59:45 - [233] - Quote Nereus with neut web scramb and a massive tank.... Seriously wtf CCP, WTF.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.03 01:19:39 - [234] - Quote 1. some sort of indicator to let people know that there might be something on the other side of a gate. It be even better if gates simply did not exist. 2. cyno is shown as a module on the hull of a ship, 3. incentivised PVP resulting in penalties to situations like 1 v 20. (read the research about gamification and game design, the solo to small content is what makes customers return and the game more interesting) I
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.07 12:51:50 - [235] - Quote Enjoyed filling in "How likely are you to recommend Eve-Online to someone you know"..... Let's see if they do anything with the NPS.
Daerrol Death By Design Did he say Jump 294	Posted - 2016.03.07 19:03:21 - [236] - Quote I live in Amarr Warzone area. I see gate camps but honestly they are quite rare. Other than major null-sec regional gates. I can't see a gatecamp lasting long in low before some group decides to bring a bigger fleet. Even still after a month of living there you should know the spots that are likely gatecamped vs the ones that aren't. Where are you seeing 3 svipul gatecamps in a row!?? (Also send in your bait DST, scram 3 of them then jump in the backup?)
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. Tactical Supremacy 81	Posted - 2016.03.07 19:47:21 - [237] - Quote All I want is to make use of the Slaves and Exotic Dancers I've had in my hangar for years. It feels like such a shame that I can't simply install a pole in my CQ and have them dance around.
Petr Lagman Lag Squad 0	Posted - 2016.03.08 11:40:28 - [238] - Quote CCP needs to think BIG because those small changes dosnt make BIG impact 1. Implement Dust 514 content into EVE Online as an expansion 2. rework PI for smartphones and tablets 3. expand "walking in stations" for gambling games that would be also avaiable on smartphones and tablets i know i would tell CCP shut up and take my money!
Xantia Naari Varmland nation 0	Posted - 2016.03.08 15:47:00 - [239] - Quote I have three simple ideas. They are not the 3 things I would want to change the most. Just some tweeks to the game. The fleet watchlist. It would be great if I could color code those that you add so you can tell them apart. For example, when running HQ incursion sites logies have a lot of people on their watchlist (The anchor, The FC, New guys and other logi). Beeing able to tell people apart easely would be great. I don't know if this is possible, but it would be nice if wrecks that are abandoned could be distingused from privat wrecks when combat scanning. This would open up an alternative way for new guys to make some isk if there are some philantropist who don't bother salaving their wrecks but chose to give them away. When running level 4 security missions and hording all the loot they generate, players will end up with hundredes upon hundreds of different moduls, ammo and what not. This is the same regardless of what faction you choose. Or atleast more or less. Missions for Brutor tribe will give you slightly more of one kind of modules then missions for caldari navy and vice verse, but there will still be hundreds upon hundreds of all kinds of stuff. So what do people do with it all? well stuff below tier 3 is reprocessed and the other stuff is sold of, but mission runners rarely have the skills to have hundreds of sell orders open at once. You see where I'm going with this... My wish is that the variety in security mission loot was more NPC corp dependent. This would spread players out more instead of focusing in certain systems like Funtanainen. The possibility to focus on getting specific kinds of modules in the loot inorder to fill a market nish would add alot more dimensions for the common mission runner and new eve player.
Niko Lorenzio United Eve Directorate 526	Posted - 2016.03.08 19:14:01 - [240] - Quote Get rid of the NDA, turn CSM into a bridge between CCP and players. Improve and add more ways for players (especially new ones) to discover and join in the countless player organized groups and activities. Improve the tools that the players have to create and provide content for their fellow players. The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Please consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI. CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!

Xantia Naari Varmland nation 0	Posted - 2016.03.10 02:55:13 - [241] - Quote After reading many of the suggestions concerning changes to PvP I find that many ask for things that border to: "CCP, make PvP so I can eat the cake and keep it at the same time" Other comments are like: "CCP, make PvP so that I never lose a fight and so that those who get killed by me enjoy it" Please try to come up with more specific tweeks instead of general and obvious things.
Starrakatt Run and Gun Mercenary Corps FETID 392	Posted - 2016.03.10 04:28:30 - [242] - Quote The game needs a Jesus feature to rekindle the veteran's interest and bring in new blood. Stagnations leads to extinction. Dinosaurs. Sneaky bastard.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.10 23:36:17 - [243] - Quote Xantia Naari wrote: After reading many of the suggestions concerning changes to PvP I find that many ask for things that border to: "CCP, make PvP so I can eat the cake and keep it at the same time" Other comments are like: "CCP, make PvP so that I never lose a fight and so that those who get killed by me enjoy it" Please try to come up with more specific tweeks instead of general and obvious things. Are you some sort of profit because as far as i'm concerned there hasn't been a single comment on that line.
Kitor Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 1	Posted - 2016.03.11 00:42:46 - [244] - Quote A little more PvE, that scale is pretty light. Battleships, especially for PvP MORE FONT OPTIONS
Terminal Insanity Pwn 'N Play SpaceMonkey's Alliance 912	Posted - 2016.03.11 01:03:19 - [245] - Quote get rid of fozziesov allow tackle modules on sieged dreads and triaged carriers. In lowsec you cant bubble them, and since theyre immune to tackle they can just jump out the moment their siege timer ends add aggression timer to interdictor bubble deployment, so that a single sabre cant cause a 400 man battleship fleet to stay aligned for 20 minutes on each gate convert every luxury yacht into a Rifter. Nobody should be immune to combat. re-add the Repackaged Volume information on info windows. So i know how much room i need to haul it. allow me to drag items from my ship cargo into the 3d station view, to move it to the station hanger. So i dont have to open up a second window and reposition it so i can drag to it get rid of fozziesov pre-load graphics assets BEFORE undocking is confirmed, so my first undock of the day isnt drifting off station while i stare at a black screen. Allow us to use fitting saves to refit ships in space on a Mobile Depot/Nestor/etc Let us pick a color for each icon on the neocom. and/or let us insert section breaks, to help group different sets of icons make faction warfare dictate highsec soverignty ownership of systems allow highsec cynos but restrict what kinds of ships can jump to them (allow jumpfreighters, so i dont need to train multiple characters to pilot my jf in highsec vs nullsec) Maybe add a highec cyno tax or something. Require a licence/certificate/item in cargo in addition to ozo Billboards. stream video of current battles automatically. Create a system to detect combat, set up a camera and stream it to billboards in the region. Allow us to put recruitment ads on them. Let us do stuff with these things. convert skill injectors into skill deleters, without telling anyone. Cheaters deserve what they get. seriously, get rid of fozziesov. We have 3 day old titan pilots, and endgame sov is fought in interceptors = broken. "War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4905	Posted - 2016.03.11 07:23:07 - [246] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: Enjoyed filling in "How likely are you to recommend Eve-Online to someone you know"..... Let's see if they do anything with the NPS. Where did you fill that? CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
Ni Neith Hedion University Amarr Empire 22	Posted - 2016.03.11 12:21:23 - [247] - Quote Dirk Magnum wrote: 1) no alts 2) no plex 3) no bullshit Step into the ring with The Madness, brother. No alts and no plex? But how is ccp supposed to milk more moneys of me then?
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.11 16:38:19 - [248] - Quote Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: Enjoyed filling in "How likely are you to recommend Eve-Online to someone you know"..... Let's see if they do anything with the NPS. Where did you fill that? Came to me over email. So I gladly filled it in with my thoughts on the current status of the game.
Indahmawar Fazmarai 4915	Posted - 2016.03.13 09:44:23 - [249] - Quote Hilti Enaka wrote: Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: Enjoyed filling in "How likely are you to recommend Eve-Online to someone you know"..... Let's see if they do anything with the NPS. Where did you fill that? Came to me over email. So I gladly filled it in with my thoughts on the current status of the game. Doh, I didn't get that email... CCP Seagull: "EVE should be a universe where the infrastructure you build and fight over is as player driven and dynamic as the EVE market is now". 62% of players: "We're not interested. May we have Plan B, please?" CCP Seagull: "What Plan B?"
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.13 23:38:33 - [250] - Quote Find it funny when "GF" is posted in local and what actually happened was 15 jumped ontop of 1. Not entirely sure what exactly was a GF and yet they are complaining about game content is stagnated.

Iain Cariaba 2797	Posted - 2016.03.14 11:35:23 - [251] - Quote Terminal Insanity wrote: get rid of fozziesov allow tackle modules on sieged dreads and triaged carriers. In lowsec you cant bubble them, and since theyre immune to tackle they can just jump out the moment their siege timer ends add aggression timer to interdictor bubble deployment, so that a single sabre cant cause a 400 man battleship fleet to stay aligned for 20 minutes on each gate convert every luxury yacht into a Rifter. Nobody should be immune to combat. re-add the Repackaged Volume information on info windows. So i know how much room i need to haul it. allow me to drag items from my ship cargo into the 3d station view, to move it to the station hanger. So i dont have to open up a second window and reposition it so i can drag to it get rid of fozziesov pre-load graphics assets BEFORE undocking is confirmed, so my first undock of the day isnt drifting off station while i stare at a black screen. Allow us to use fitting saves to refit ships in space on a Mobile Depot/Nestor/etc Let us pick a color for each icon on the neocom. and/or let us insert section breaks, to help group different sets of icons make faction warfare dictate highsec soverignty ownership of systems allow highsec cynos but restrict what kinds of ships can jump to them (allow jumpfreighters, so i dont need to train multiple characters to pilot my jf in highsec vs nullsec) Maybe add a highec cyno tax or something. Require a licence/certificate/item in cargo in addition to ozo Billboards. stream video of current battles automatically. Create a system to detect combat, set up a camera and stream it to billboards in the region. Allow us to put recruitment ads on them. Let us do stuff with these things. convert skill injectors into skill deleters, without telling anyone. Cheaters deserve what they get. seriously, get rid of fozziesov. We have 3 day old titan pilots, and endgame sov is fought in interceptors = broken. 1. Your coalition has suffered the least due to this. Stop whining. 2. They're called HICs. Learn to use them. 3. If the 400 man battleship fleet failed to bring anti-dictor support, that's their own fault. 4. According to killboards, the yachts explode just fine. Work on being less bad at the game. 5. 2500 for a frig/desty, 5k for cruisers/BCs, 50k for battleships... not that difficult to remember. 6. LOL!!! You actually use the hangar portion of the station panel? Disable it and learn to use the inventory window. Everything you need in one place. 7. See #1. 8. Open launcher, click settings, check the box next to where it says "Download everything." Problem solved. 9. Huh, I thought this was already possible. Granted, it's been a while since I've had to actually use a depot. 10. Just group them anyway. It's not difficult in the slightest to remember what does what. 11. Security status should remain independent of controlling entity. Might as well say that if the same coalition controlled the same area of null for X period of time, that it should become highsec as well, losing all benefits to being nullsec. 12. I read that one as "CCP, please take away the only time my jump freighter is ever in any danger." 13. Videos of battles that CCP uses as advertising takes a lot of work, otherwise all that would show is a series of colored dots resembling ball shapes. As far as the ads go, when you look at the lists of station names in nullsec, and notice they're almost all **** jokes of some kind, I'm sure CCP realizes that letting players control whats shown on the billboards is not a good idea. 14. So, anyone who's ever bought a character off the bazaar is a cheater? Same concept, just on a larger scale. 15. My, you really are butthurt over fozziesov, aren't you? FYI, 3 day old titan pilots have nothing at all to do with fozziesov. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.14 13:18:42 - [252] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Terminal Insanity wrote: get rid of fozziesov allow tackle modules on sieged dreads and triaged carriers. In lowsec you cant bubble them, and since theyre immune to tackle they can just jump out the moment their siege timer ends add aggression timer to interdictor bubble deployment, so that a single sabre cant cause a 400 man battleship fleet to stay aligned for 20 minutes on each gate convert every luxury yacht into a Rifter. Nobody should be immune to combat. re-add the Repackaged Volume information on info windows. So i know how much room i need to haul it. allow me to drag items from my ship cargo into the 3d station view, to move it to the station hanger. So i dont have to open up a second window and reposition it so i can drag to it get rid of fozziesov pre-load graphics assets BEFORE undocking is confirmed, so my first undock of the day isnt drifting off station while i stare at a black screen. Allow us to use fitting saves to refit ships in space on a Mobile Depot/Nestor/etc Let us pick a color for each icon on the neocom. and/or let us insert section breaks, to help group different sets of icons make faction warfare dictate highsec soverignty ownership of systems allow highsec cynos but restrict what kinds of ships can jump to them (allow jumpfreighters, so i dont need to train multiple characters to pilot my jf in highsec vs nullsec) Maybe add a highec cyno tax or something. Require a licence/certificate/item in cargo in addition to ozo Billboards. stream video of current battles automatically. Create a system to detect combat, set up a camera and stream it to billboards in the region. Allow us to put recruitment ads on them. Let us do stuff with these things. convert skill injectors into skill deleters, without telling anyone. Cheaters deserve what they get. seriously, get rid of fozziesov. We have 3 day old titan pilots, and endgame sov is fought in interceptors = broken. 1. Your coalition has suffered the least due to this. Stop whining. 2. They're called HICs. Learn to use them. 3. If the 400 man battleship fleet failed to bring anti-dictor support, that's their own fault. 4. According to killboards, the yachts explode just fine. Work on being less bad at the game. 5. 2500 for a frig/desty, 5k for cruisers/BCs, 50k for battleships... not that difficult to remember. 6. LOL!!! You actually use the hangar portion of the station panel? Disable it and learn to use the inventory window. Everything you need in one place. 7. See #1. 8. Open launcher, click settings, check the box next to where it says "Download everything." Problem solved. 9. Huh, I thought this was already possible. Granted, it's been a while since I've had to actually use a depot. 10. Just group them anyway. It's not difficult in the slightest to remember what does what. 11. Security status should remain independent of controlling entity. Might as well say that if the same coalition controlled the same area of null for X period of time, that it should become highsec as well, losing all benefits to being nullsec. 12. I read that one as "CCP, please take away the only time my jump freighter is ever in any danger." 13. Videos of battles that CCP uses as advertising takes a lot of work, otherwise all that would show is a series of colored dots resembling ball shapes. As far as the ads go, when you look at the lists of station names in nullsec, and notice they're almost all **** jokes of some kind, I'm sure CCP realizes that letting players control whats shown on the billboards is not a good idea. 14. So, anyone who's ever bought a character off the bazaar is a cheater? Same concept, just on a larger scale. 15. My, you really are butthurt over fozziesov, aren't you? FYI, 3 day old titan pilots have nothing at all to do with fozziesov. Made me laught this. My thoughts on Fozziesov... If it turns into the power struggle, fight for dominance, engaging, dynamic content that most of the null cry babies are saying is missing then i'm all for it. The game used to be fun. That was in the days of when people created content because meh it's a video game. Somewhere a long the line we got into making things you do in the game connected to real life value hence why there are dweebs moaning about high incursion income. If you want a less stagnate null sec stop blueing up every man and their dog. That said, this is about PVP in general not null sec vs low sec vs high sec. i'm sure you can find that elsewhere. PVP drives all other tracks in the game, directly or indirectly. I wrote the post through pure frustration and fear at the communities anal-ness at creating content. Frustration because it has become dull and predictable and fear that this game is losing it's identity. It's literally turning into a game that has very little connection to what it promises. CCP should be trying to create content not restrict it and making the connection to null sec stagnation, there was a time in the game when solo and small gang had a place, these are the groups that create a less stagnated game. These days it's K/d ratio efficiency on the killboard, it's paralyzing ecm warfare, it's logi n+1, and "fit a god dam short or long point and web will you".
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.14 23:52:44 - [253] - Quote What exactly is the point in gate guns? It's overcome by tanking logi ships.... This is why I hate logi.
W33b3l The Scope Gallente Federation 56	Posted - 2016.03.15 00:33:31 - [254] - Quote Remove SCC loss for blowing up people in lowsec. Make covert ops cloaks remove you from local chat unless you type in it. Remove aurum from the game
beakerax Pator Tech School 230	Posted - 2016.03.15 01:10:30 - [255] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: 2500 for a frig/desty, 5k for cruisers/BCs, 50k for battleships... not that difficult to remember.
Rei nishana DNS Requiem Cede Nullis 2	Posted - 2016.03.15 15:52:26 - [256] - Quote 1. New things to make living in SOV space better. 2. giving better content to miners and indy. (Yes you might hate them but remember who builds our ships to pvp in.) 3. Bring back capital fleet SOV not this "I am going to go here and entosis this with my interceptor."
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.17 15:06:40 - [257] - Quote Rei nishana wrote: 1. New things to make living in SOV space better. 2. giving better content to miners and indy. (Yes you might hate them but remember who builds our ships to pvp in.) 3. Bring back capital fleet SOV not this "I am going to go here and entosis this with my interceptor." 1. definitely required - I think the game in null sec has been pretty much about - Getting access to the best source of passive income - Being able to make it safe to travel from high sec to low sec by means of blue balling everyone and having a JB network that no one likes using now (I wish they'd change the jump fatigued on Jump Bridges, when there was traffic it was actually a great source of content. - Unless the plans are to take over SOV, don't undock because they'll get bored and leave. 2. Not a miner so no comment. 3. I kinda think this point - Unless the plans are to take over SOV, don't undock because they'll get bored and leave - is probably what Fozzie is trying to address and I do actually like the concept at least i'm just not sure how it will play out. On the other hand the role of caps is changing, I mean, "solo nano carrier's" instead of solo frigate roams. People do this because they want content they want to try their luck but also when **** goes wrong be able to survive. I see a lot of content in Eve avoided because of game mechanics and the culture of what the community has become.
Duke Wendo The Projects Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle 59	Posted - 2016.03.17 20:54:26 - [258] - Quote 1. Rework nullsec. No more enormous entities owning large swathes of empty space. Make system ownership dependent on activity in that system. Make system upgrades and structures in a tiered system that can be attacked and destroyed and rebuilt by various strengths of invading fleets so that your group has to be active or move back to high/ low with NPC infrastructure. Make people WANT to go out to null- whatever they enjoy doing in high-sec- make it bigger and better in null. 2. Make PvE good. Missions need to be interesting and challenging and encourage teamwork (like a MMO!) Exploration needs to live up to the terminology. Not just scanning pve sites and running them- the same every time. Some way or form of randomness so that people can't just look up a site guide and do it. Same with wormholes - everyone knows their statics and how much mass they can take- zzzzzzzz - PvE is just so boring if there's a formula to follow. ( I know people can choose not to look but once you've ran the same site a few times, it becomes a chore) Even more development in PI- its a whole planet after all- billions of people living there- planets and moons could be developed in a sim-city/ factorio style mini-game as you build and manage your empires. ISK making industry and defences, etc. 3. Make a bounty system that works like the terminology. If I have a kill right on someone- or someone is a criminal- allow me make a contract on their ship or pod. I can assign the contract to a particular player or corp (disallowing someone using their alt to kill their mains) and I can decide how much I will pay for their destruction. Bounty hunters and bounty hunting corps would spring up to compete for the contracts. The same with wardecs- make a war mean something other than just the destruction of ships. Eve has amazing potential and the lore/ universe is amazing- I just wish it was developed faster :(
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 99	Posted - 2016.03.23 17:33:07 - [259] - Quote Duke Wendo wrote: 1. Rework nullsec. No more enormous entities owning large swathes of empty space. Make system ownership dependent on activity in that system. Make system upgrades and structures in a tiered system that can be attacked and destroyed and rebuilt by various strengths of invading fleets so that your group has to be active or move back to high/ low with NPC infrastructure. Make people WANT to go out to null- whatever they enjoy doing in high-sec- make it bigger and better in null. 2. Make PvE good. Missions need to be interesting and challenging and encourage teamwork (like a MMO!) Exploration needs to live up to the terminology. Not just scanning pve sites and running them- the same every time. Some way or form of randomness so that people can't just look up a site guide and do it. Same with wormholes - everyone knows their statics and how much mass they can take- zzzzzzzz - PvE is just so boring if there's a formula to follow. ( I know people can choose not to look but once you've ran the same site a few times, it becomes a chore) Even more development in PI- its a whole planet after all- billions of people living there- planets and moons could be developed in a sim-city/ factorio style mini-game as you build and manage your empires. ISK making industry and defences, etc. 3. Make a bounty system that works like the terminology. If I have a kill right on someone- or someone is a criminal- allow me make a contract on their ship or pod. I can assign the contract to a particular player or corp (disallowing someone using their alt to kill their mains) and I can decide how much I will pay for their destruction. Bounty hunters and bounty hunting corps would spring up to compete for the contracts. The same with wardecs- make a war mean something other than just the destruction of ships. Eve has amazing potential and the lore/ universe is amazing- I just wish it was developed faster :( 1. I don't think it's about making what people enjoy in high-sec bigger and better in null-sec. It's more to do with transforming the gaming experience so that people can play the game without needing to go to high sec. It's the type of transition we talk about with bringing tech into a business. If all we do is enhance what we already do then we don't actually change anything. On the other hand if we can transform the way we do what we do so that it can't be done without technology we will then see huge returns. It's the same thing in game. Get to a point where people can live and enjoy the game in null sec without needing low and high sec you will then see the type of transformation null sec requires. 2. PVE - Blah bores the hell out of me but it brings me content. 3. i do think the bounty system needs some work.
000Hunter000 Missiles 'R' Us 52	Posted - 2016.03.23 22:33:36 - [260] - Quote 3 things huh? I mis the times where you could spend days in a system without seeing anyone else and when seeing a Battleship was something special then. Now it seems too easy to skill up/get iskies. Wardecs...mebbe a system where u need to have an X amount of corpmembers before u can wardec or get wardecced or mebbe a time limit? Like if u start a corp, u can't get a wardec the first X weeks/months? This gives small corps a chance to grow a lil, before they get squashed [:=d Remove the skill injector shizzle and plex selling (keep the ability to buy gametime with ingame iskies though) Flame away people!

Lulu Lunette ThinkTank Phoenix TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance 333	Posted - 2016.03.24 05:31:31 - [261] - Quote Wouldn't change a thing. @lunettelulu7
Jian Mira Aliastra Gallente Federation 16	Posted - 2016.03.24 12:10:53 - [262] - Quote They need to move away from the Excel style menu system.... use more button and icons and expand the swirl menu system... they also need to update the docking so that instead of ducking inside the station have it outside with a docking ring idea... I still think the Captain Quaters area needs a complete re-thiink and then it would be used more... you should be able to control your ship from inside CQ and change the fit, cargo etc.... The CQ is rather useless and a bit obsolete at the moment.
Xantia Naari Varmland nation 0	Posted - 2016.04.06 14:57:42 - [263] - Quote 1. I would like to nerf the targeting time of fits that more or less insta-lock to more then 3,5 s. It should not be possible to catch everything on gate camps. Some things need to be able to slipp through. 2. Possibility to color and group people on the fleet-watch list 3. I want an ingame fitting application, so that I can test fits, see the stats and such, before buying the modules. I can not believe this does not exist by now. Why!? I do not want more third party API applications. I want more first party EVE online applications. Don't outsource your own jobs CCP, unless you intend to fully integrate the products into the game. additional: I would like to see more science lore explanations as to how the futuristic technology in game supposedly works. Also, it would be cool with some more dynamic missions that involve resent events covered by the scope. (something along the line with what you did with the wyvern that was stolen by the Guristas, but keep building on the story. Don't just abandon it). Thank you
Xantia Naari Varmland nation 0	Posted - 2016.04.06 15:15:11 - [264] - Quote J'Poll wrote: 1. Remove Concord. 2. Ban all carebears (as in people who are 200% against any form of PvP possibility) 3. Remove high-sec. and then EVE will never get a singel new player. It will be filled with bitter vets like yourself for a month before shutting down for good
Vol Arm'OOO Bagel and Lox 787	Posted - 2016.04.06 15:36:14 - [265] - Quote The only thing I want back in eve is viable can flipping. Reduce the cargo holds of barges to make can flipping viable again. Oh and on a related note, make it so that idiots can use orcas again as giant unpiloted floating cans with the possibility of them being jacked like in the old days. I don't play, I just fourm warrior.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 4137	Posted - 2016.04.06 15:38:52 - [266] - Quote Vol Arm'OOO wrote: The only thing I want back in eve is viable can flipping. Reduce the cargo holds of barges to make can flipping viable again. Oh and on a related note, make it so that idiots can use orcas again as giant unpiloted floating cans with the possibility of them being jacked like in the old days. There's exactly two things you need to make this work. 1. Like you said reduce mining barge ore bays to sensible levels 2. Remove the fact that suspect flagged characters can have their property looted by anyone without any consequence (this doesn't seem to serve any purpose whatsoever except to eliminate canflipping, presumably Greyscale did this on purpose because he was completely against all forms of PVP in highsec even existing)
P3ps1 Max Hedion University Amarr Empire 31	Posted - 2016.04.07 03:08:14 - [267] - Quote 1 = mining Mining needs love. Be cool if it was a basic POS setup built on an asteroid belt. Upgrade them similar to planetary interaction. The real aim is to introduce new players to POS ownership at an early stage (aka noob friendly). Maybe throw in a mining foreman handing out certain missions like the current research agents do. Just an idea. 2 = Nebulas Need more backdrops 3 = effects Love eye candy
Lexiana Del'Amore Nouvelle Rouvenor Spaceship Bebop 189	Posted - 2016.04.07 10:17:57 - [268] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Bruce Kemp wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. Logi is not OP i have solo engaged a oneros and a gila (in my gila) killed te logi and then killed the gila... Yeah no one really complains about it at the small gang level. It's more an issue at the block level fleet engagements where the decision about fight or flight comes down to whether there is enough DPS to punch through the opposition logistic reps or not. The side with the best logistics has the upper hand. Some the upcoming changes will hopefully rebalance the nullsec logistics without changing small gang use too much. Alpha fleets... matters not howmuch logi they have...
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 100	Posted - 2016.04.11 12:18:30 - [269] - Quote Personally loving the battles in the North at the moment but whilst they highlight what can be possible and is right for the game it also highlights what can't be possible and is seriously wrong. It's took the Mitanni to **** off the entire eve community to get to this state where people are actually enjoying playing the game again. This is what the game developers should be trying to encourage with new features. A lot of the balancing work and new ships etc have been released and i'm not entirely convinced the devs knew what they were trying to achieve. They have to stop this type of development and think more about the value and experience a player gets with such releases. I amongst others think logi and Ewar are the cancer of the game and would really encourage a complete rethink of these mechanics. I'd also like to see the game move into more emphasis on rewards and leaderboards. I don't think the eve killboards provide the right incentives, they in fact promote the wrong behaviour with much emphasis on k/d ratio. Didn't think this thread would last but it appears that people are still stopping by.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 100	Posted - 2016.04.11 12:25:34 - [270] - Quote Lexiana Del'Amore wrote: Scipio Artelius wrote: Bruce Kemp wrote: Hilti Enaka wrote: 2. Logi ships - another contribution to the "I WIN" button, they tend to be the decision to go out and roam or not to go out and roam, as well as the decision to engage or not to engage, it always comes down to if your bringing 10 logi ships i am bringing 15. Logi is not OP i have solo engaged a oneros and a gila (in my gila) killed te logi and then killed the gila... Yeah no one really complains about it at the small gang level. It's more an issue at the block level fleet engagements where the decision about fight or flight comes down to whether there is enough DPS to punch through the opposition logistic reps or not. The side with the best logistics has the upper hand. Some the upcoming changes will hopefully rebalance the nullsec logistics without changing small gang use too much. Alpha fleets... matters not howmuch logi they have... Having experienced this recently i can tell you that nothing has changed since the last time people were saying "bring alpha fleets". With the current hardware, it is clear this counter still is not a viable value adding gaming experience. It just teaches one thing, bring more, and of course when that happens servers come to a holt and we ***** and moan at sitting staring a blank screens for an hour. Again, the war in the north tells you exactly what is good and bad for the game.

Dolorous Tremmens Lightspeed Enterprises 152	Posted - 2016.04.14 16:04:18 - [271] - Quote 1- give people the ability to change their actual character heights. Not all of us want to see eye to eye. 2- More alternate bonuses for logi. Great for repping and all, and certain ships get bonuses to things like remote tracking, but give them an alternate use/ability more tied to combat. a base speed boost for missile ships(caldari), a single extra scripted hull resist bonus(ducttape for minnies!) agility bonuses for amarr. ability to NOS extra power at lowered cost to the targeted ship for gallente( the opposite of cap chaining). 3- Pink paint color schemes, but really more tint variations on existing an future paint jobs. not full on color shanges, just a few shades difference. But certainly pink ships. Get some Eve. Make it yours.
Bianca Niam Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 34	Posted - 2016.04.14 17:30:57 - [272] - Quote 1) Bumping should make your ship explode. Only in eve can a tiny frigate bump into a giant metal ball (such as a carrier) with over 5000 meters per second and live to tell the tale. It's beyond dumb. 2) Cancel pay 2 win. Skill injectors. 3) Partner up with AMD. The nvidia love is embarrassing. They play dirty tricks.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.