| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
DARK SYCOPATA
Return to The Gargantua
0
   |
Posted - 2016.08.06 09:19:18 -
[1] - Quote
The human need 8 hours of sleep every day 24 hours Anchoring time on Citadels not follow human din+ímics.
I supose the 24 hours timer follow the path to preventivo the ninja instalatin of Citadels. But why no ser this:
Anchor Citadel 2 days
Day 1: 12 invulnerability 12 vulnerability
Day 2: 12 invulnerability 12 vulnerability
This can create more PVP oportunities and give time to people to sleep. Eat. Work. Studie etc...
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin.
DARKNESS.
2671
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 10:25:16 -
[2] - Quote
How does a 12 hour vulnerability twice during the anchoring process allow for more sleep, eat, work, study than a 24 hour timer of complete invulnerability that you can set to your preferred timezone so that it does not interfere with any sleep, eat, work pattern?
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Bumblefck
Kerensky Initiatives
12750
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 12:21:58 -
[3] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:How does a 12 hour vulnerability twice during the anchoring process allow for more sleep, eat, work, study than a 24 hour timer of complete invulnerability that you can set to your preferred timezone so that it does not interfere with any sleep, eat, work pattern?
Maybe if your interior logic is conducted in the persecuted language of Spanish it makes sense, maybe?
Enquiring minds want to know!
Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi .
Bumble's Space Log
|
DARK SYCOPATA
Return to The Gargantua
0
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 13:45:02 -
[4] - Quote
Before you succeful Anchor a Citadel they stay 24 hous vulnerable.... I no speak about the 3h self selectet vulnerability after you Anchor it... Tnx for your feedback. |
ISD Decoy
isd community communications liaisons
1672
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 16:27:20 -
[5] - Quote
I have removed an off-topic post. Be respectful.
Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.
ISD Decoy
Captain
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Solecist Project
The Scope
Gallente Federation
31784
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 16:57:15 -
[6] - Quote
Wouldn't it make more sense to simply have a variable anchor time, within reason?
Like, let people choose the speed of the anchoring process (maybe with a price) and allow them some leeway.
CCP has better numbers, but usually a 24h cycle is rather bad for playing.
It forces people with fixed daily intervals to start anchoring their citadels at the beginning of the playtime ...
... so they can use it the most on next day. This also means that at least one day before anchoring there will
be a significant amount of time spent preparing the anchoring process.
While this isn't avoidable, a variable window would still not force such people to anchor it at the earliest possible time during their playwindow and thus cause less stress. Setting the window to 22h or maybe 26h would allow a tiny bit of variability, which quite naturally reflects how the whole universe works, too! It would allow adjustment to human nature and reduce stress.
sorry if i am hijacking this now, i actually just thought of counter-arguments and it ended like this.
"That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breaths of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly pulverised by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds." -- Tippia
|
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale
Black Marker
343
|
Posted - 2016.08.06 17:29:35 -
[7] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Wouldn't it make more sense to simply have a variable anchor time, within reason?
Like, let people choose the speed of the anchoring process (maybe with a price) and allow them some leeway.
CCP has better numbers, but usually a 24h cycle is rather bad for playing.
It forces people with fixed daily intervals to start anchoring their citadels at the beginning of the playtime ...
... so they can use it the most on next day. This also means that at least one day before anchoring there will
be a significant amount of time spent preparing the anchoring process.
While this isn't avoidable, a variable window would still not force such people to anchor it at the earliest possible time during their playwindow and thus cause less stress. Setting the window to 22h or maybe 26h would allow a tiny bit of variability, which quite naturally reflects how the whole universe works, too! It would allow adjustment to human nature and reduce stress.
sorry if i am hijacking this now, i actually just thought of counter-arguments and it ended like this.
Guess what. It's not a structure for solo players. EVE is not a game for solo players. Your "problem" is a solo player problem.
When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.
|
Peppermintstix
Exsilium Militaris
Exiled Collective
6
|
Posted - 2016.08.07 07:51:26 -
[8] - Quote
DARK SYCOPATA wrote:The human need 8 hours of sleep every day 24 hours Anchoring time on Citadels not follow human din+ímics.
I supose the 24 hours timer follow the path to preventinc the ninja instalation of Citadels.
I propose:
Anchor Citadel 2 days
Day 1: 12 invulnerability 12 vulnerability
Day 2: 12 invulnerability 12 vulnerability
This can create more PVP oportunities and give time to people to sleep. Eat. Work. Studie etc...
No, There is no good reason for this change... if you know a citadel is being anchored, you have the countdown timer and and come and kill it in its first 15 minutes.. if your to lazy to hit it at that time or its a bad time zone for you then thats tough.. thats one of the advantages of being the party who dropped it.
it would also be completely terrible to be forced to camp a system for 2 days for a citadel to anchor.. no one would like doing it.
|
Jai Blaze
Honor Forge
Joint Operation Involving Nobodys
1
|
Posted - 2016.08.08 09:32:45 -
[9] - Quote
48hrs - terrible idea, unless you scaled the time with the size of the citadel, and you reduced the time for the Astrahus class to less than 24. I could understand that, if still not completely agree with the idea. Eve already has too many areas that require extremely long periods of alertness, casual players are cut-off from a lot of the gameplay. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |