|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
SUNscatcher
   |
Posted - 2003.12.09 19:22:00 -
[1]
Its funny how Hellmar was complaining about the lack of mining in 0.0 space and out comes an announcement that changes are being made to make JIP/gatecamping easier for the pirates.
Somehow I fail to see the 'added' incentive to mine in 0.0 space when ccp is making it much more difficult to get out there.
I don't know maybe its the long winters that creates this kind of logic.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 21:15:00 -
[2]
I don't know that empire space will become crowded but I do think you will see more people just logging on to switch skill training.
Some of the chaos testers are stating travel times 2/3 times what they currently are.
Personally If they rearranged the map somewhat and only instituted this change at the choke points it would probably help the game. But in the same manner when a minority clammored for removal of the superhighways increasing travel time hurts the game.
Most all the good hunting and mining areas in 0.0 are at the map tips anyway which is a big discouragement to travel there. Double or triple the time it takes to get there. I've got better things to do and will happily sit in empire space AFK mining waiting for my agents timer to run down.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.09 23:24:00 -
[3]
this isn't a move to bring move people into 0.0 space it is a move to appease the carebear whinner pirates so they can kill players easier while sitting on their asses doing nothing at JIP/gates.
Talk about a bunch of whiney losers, "we hate this game cause its too hard to blow up other peoples ships ..........."
I had thought that Hellmar was leading the future direction of EVE but now with TomB's upcoming change I am having a lot of trouble figuring out who is the head and who the tail.
For those that insist on PvP being the major component of the game this change probably makes sense. IF those players are a majority or a significant percentage of the player population I'll go with it.
But if they are just a small and very vocal minority then these changes will have a major change to the way eve can be played even when players are not involved in PvP activity.
Once again the squeaky wheel gets the grease or maybe we are seeing a MAJOR change in leadership from ccp and we should expect a continued emphasise on PvP and a continued decline in other areas.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 15:53:00 -
[4]
Hey it isnt' just about getting through a camped gate!!!!!! 99.99% of the time you are playing is doing something else than trying to get through a gate and this will have a major NEGATIVE impact. That is not an improvement. IF tomB can come up with a way to limit these changes to the choke points fine. But this isn't a good change for 99% of the space out there that isn't ever going to be camped.
Thats the point, A MAJOR CHANGE to the entire structure of the game to address a problem that only actually exists within a few dozen systems.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 17:58:00 -
[5]
I think I saw that the dev's expected the indy's to be protected but since there is no way to prevent the enemy from targeting them first running an indy through a camped spot will be impossible.
Lots of discussion on the PvP aspects but the real impact on this change will be on the economy. I suspect this change will have severe and very negative affects in that regard.
With battleship prices at 120 mill and climbing fast additional incentive to never leave secure space provided.
Running missions with travel time tripled or worse, imo travel time for some missions was pretty significant as it is now.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.10 22:06:00 -
[6]
Aiwa if these changes could be limited to just those gates where camping actually occurs it wouldn't be a big deal and would help the game. BUT why is it going to help the other 4980 system that are never camped, never gonna be camped, and this change will just double or triple your travel time through them.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 17:36:00 -
[7]
unlike other major changes this change was put in to improve PvP game play.
I am suggesting that this feature can be put in only at the check points leading into 0.0 space. Let the game run for a month or two to determine how well it works.
This feature does NOT need to be impletmented universe wide initially to find out if it improves the game or not.
Limit the in game "beta testing" to a small number of systems, thats a REASONABLE approach.
Just bringing in this solution for PvP when it will have even a GREATER IMPACT on the economy is irresponsible. Find some balls Hellmar and get control of your game back!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EVE isn't about PvP. PvP is just one of many features in the game.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 18:03:00 -
[8]
Its time to accept the fact that bringing in changes without evaluating their full impact is **** poor management.
Thank you for amplifing my point jash that PvP IS JUST ONE FEATURE intertwined with many others.
TomB's focus is strictly on PvP. Fine. But I do have an expectation that Hellmar brings a balance to TomB's focus. Its called the team approach. TomB is doing his part very well from what I can see but Hellmar is responsible for overall balance and he is not performing well. I say this because this change will have a greater impact on the game away from PvP and that impact has not even been evaluated.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 19:02:00 -
[9]
testing on chaos has limited value. The real test will be when its implemented on T. Irresponsible is bringing a change to the game without evaluating its full impact and the proposed changes will have a significant impact on the game away for PvP.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 19:09:00 -
[10]
Edited by: SUNscatcher on 11/12/2003 19:10:01
Lets face it Jash 99% of the time camping is going to occur within a fixed number of systems. These are easily predicted because camping occurs there today. Limit the implementation to those areas and while working out the bugs evalute the impact on the economy. Then maybe expanding this change to other systems will be warrented and maybe not.
There is no reason this change can't be approached slowly just as eliminating unlimited BPC's was. Creates less stress and hartache and allows people to adjust to the changes at a slower pace.
Not everyone thinks jumping into the deep end of the pool is the best way to learn how to swim.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
|
|
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 20:04:00 -
[11]
I have to agree that I enjoy playing eve immensely and never participate in PvP. This change isn't limited to just the points campers camp. It will affect travel throughout the eve universe and that affect will results in players traveling less, not more.
Ultimately I think the pirates will suffer the most because as people stop traveling, though they have the means to kill other players, there won't be travelers in significant numbers to make spending hour upon hour at a gate enjoyable. Thus the change to improve their game will result in no improvement in the long run.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 20:58:00 -
[12]
Slowing down travel in eve will hurt the game in the long run.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.11 22:37:00 -
[13]
Drunken there are two concerns, one getting through a camped gate won't be possible(no real evidence to support this one way or the other but camp spots can still be avoided as they currently are) but the second point that people are really screaming about(and is my biggest concern) is increasing travel times 2, 3 times what they currently are(maybe even more). Its the second point that will have a major impact on gameplay even when not involved in PvP.
I have suggested making the changes to the gate mechanics only in the choke areas at first(a small trial area to work out the bugs) rather than forcing it monday universe wide. Opposition to this doesn't make sense to this except that there are always people unwilling to compromise.
Well if eve is ever going to work then compromises have to be made by all because no one group can get everything they want without ****in off the majority. At least that is the way I see the future of the game.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 02:54:00 -
[14]
I can't speak for other people drunken but here is one viewpoint. For months a lot of people have been frustrated with eve. The "Big fix" has been touted as the arrival of tech 2.
Just as tech 2 is about to be delievered along comes another announcement that a major change in the way the game is played is also coming. On the surface the intent of the second change sounds promising but then when you give it some thought it quickly comes to mind that it will have a major impact on how the game is played.
frustration + anticipation = stress then add being blindsided by a major change. Is it really that difficult that some people have to vent?
I think the proposed changes for jump gates have to get into the "real" game to fully work out the details but I have also suggested limiting their application giving people the option to avoid them completely if they chose too.
The bugs will never be worked out on chaos. Until the dev's know what the final product will be and THEN can evaluate the effect of full scale implementation into the game, the trial area should be small and manageable but large enough so as to allow a real trial run in the real time eve enviorment.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 18:05:00 -
[15]
Well arms I feel that your post is really off topic here, just my opinion.
Jash thank you for pointing out the fact people can avoid gatecampers if they wish(like that is news to anyone) and also missing the complaint that this change will have an impact that has nothing to do with PvP, SLOWING DOWN TRAVEL throughout the eve universe. You may find it interesting to spend 10 minutes approaching a gate but 99.999999999% of the rest of us find it boring as hell.
The proposed changes sound promising but I am still a firm believer that the bugs can't be worked out in chaos. I an also a firm believer that only a small trial area in tranq. should be used to work the bugs.
This is to minimize upsetting the game until we know what the final product is as little as possible and give us time to ponder the impact these changes will have on the other aspects of eve that don't involve PvP.
I'm just asking for a slower approach instead of the "here it is live with it" one.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 18:45:00 -
[16]
well jash if the small trial area was the 20 systems surrounding the entrance systems to 0.0 space the choice would be to stay in empire or enter the trial area.
Sorry, very easy to have misunderstood my perspective of "small" but I envision the trial area encompassing about 200 systems.
And what i mean by the entrance systems are those first systems entered when jumping into 0.0 space.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
SUNscatcher
|
Posted - 2003.12.12 21:51:00 -
[17]
Sounds like a very good idea to me.
If you can catch me you can have me. |
|
|
| |
|