|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 20 post(s) |
Rroff
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
1013
   |
Posted - 2016.11.17 15:14:10 -
[1] - Quote
Urduri wrote:[quote=Vyctam Shadowclaw] CCP is doing a good job of eliminating long-term subscribers one account at a time. 
What gets me - I don't know why they had to double down on the solution - like many of the past changes that have resulted in a not insignificant number of people leaving they've gone full tilt at it rather than try to find a balance between the different types of players.
While you'll always get some complaining keeping some of the (local) defensive bonuses, web range and mining, etc. stuff to the old system but moving some of the offensive centric boosts to the new system i.e. point range, remote rep, ewar and prop mod speed would have gone a long way to dealing with the main complaints about 10+km/s frigs pointing at 30+km or whatever, added some degree of interesting gameplay to it (the new setup is way too much of a chore) while not ******* off those players who'd invested in links setups for PVE, certain fleet compositions, etc. Also while making drug boosters essential for PVP isn't probably a good end result a certain amount of balance could have been provided as well by introducing PVP specific boosters for small gang and solo type use that don't stack with links and provide a potentially more desirable benefit over links for specific areas like point range. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1015
|
Posted - 2016.11.24 11:24:07 -
[2] - Quote
Not spent that much time with them so far since returning as I dislike the system - but I noticed a couple of times with 3 characters in fleet it said something like "boosts applied to 1 ship" when activating them with all ships in range and active on grid (I had the other 2 target locked). |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1016
|
Posted - 2016.11.29 16:04:28 -
[3] - Quote
Urbusk P'Tchu wrote:NOT at all happy w/ this change . Do not understand why you turn everything we work to get . And just tell us to bad .
One thing I don't like about it - for stuff like local tank buffs, mining, etc. if you make the ammo too limited it becomes too much of a chore to be worth dealing with, if you make the ammo relatively plentiful (as they've done) then most of the time for all intents and purposes its the same as unlimited except that very rare case you forget to stock up - which is a mechanic that over the last few years they've worked extensively to remove from eve so not sure why its been introduced here.
That said I do like the way the system works for stuff like point range, ewar and remote repair as they have a much bigger impact and that level of bonus should require some effort - infact if remote repair bonuses were a targeted limited area of effect (say 8km or something around the targetted ship) that could be quite interesting. |
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
1021
|
Posted - 2016.12.04 21:03:18 -
[4] - Quote
Logan Revelore wrote:
Game design isn't terrible just because it negatively impacts your current applied strategy. If you look at it, not from your own view point, but from the game design view point, then you'll see that it makes sense to remove off grid boosting.
From a game design perspective there isn't really a right or wrong perspective to off grid boosting what is more important is the overall gameplay that surrounds it and how it is executed and even then just because a particular implementation is "more right" doesn't mean that the right approach is a dramatic shift to that end.
There are some aspects of the new system I really like and infact don't think CCP has gone far enough while on the other hand there are changes that while more "valid" maybe as a gameplay mechanic had a bigger impact on people who were making use of links in more esoteric fashion or other ways that weren't directly connected to the areas where links caused an undesirable impact and IMO far less imperative to make such dramatic changes to even if the changes could be seen as more "right". |
|
|
| |
|