Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.10 13:41:00 -
[361]
Originally by: Aramendel Edited by: Aramendel on 10/05/2007 00:07:02
Originally by: Venkul Mul You say: Pirate get little isk, we need a boost.
No. No. No. No. No. No. And: No.
I did NOT say that. I said that hunting barges is usually rather unprofitable or a waste of time. That does not say piracy in general is unprofitable or that it needs a boost. Just that if I would do piracy for isk barges would be one of the last targets I would seek out.
Seeing that the sum of your posts in this thread is:
systems to maintain/increase the current chance of escape/survivial by targets after the change = bad
systems to reduce the current chance of escape/survivial by targets after the change = good
the conclusion that you want a boost for the pirate seemed precise. As you say it not true, then it must be so.
My personal impression is that you base your balance evalutations only on combat targets, but what can be balanced when it increase the chance of a combat between combat ships, it is only a deadly trap when one of the 2 party include non combat ships.
You, as before, will reply that bringing enough escorting ships (equal or more than what a attacking party will bring) will rebalance the scales.
To me your solution simply say: "to get 30% more isk you need to spend 100% more time", time needed to bring togheter the defending force, to move all the people in the right location, the time of the defending people, and so on.
Simply it is not worth it, not only isk wise, but even fun wise.
I mine when I feel the "reward" is worth it, those rewards are the pride of building a new ship, helping my corporation with minerals, even getting a shiny pile of isk.
If for the same "reward" I should work duble, annoy a lot of people that want to do PVP or PVE, and so on, simply it is no more fun but a job.
Your position is the mirror one of mine. You think that the changes that can help the defender surviving will reduce your fun factor. As we seek two different kind of fun I dubt we will ever find a middle ground.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.10 22:49:00 -
[362]
Edited by: Aramendel on 10/05/2007 22:52:57
Originally by: Venkul Mul Seeing that the sum of your posts in this thread is:
systems to maintain/increase the current chance of escape/survivial by targets after the change = bad
systems to reduce the current chance of escape/survivial by targets after the change = good
the conclusion that you want a boost for the pirate seemed precise.
Again, no. You are reading stuff which simply isn't there.
What I was saying a few times is that it is right now for targets FAR easier to avoid attackers than it is for attackers to catch a target. To the point that if both sides pay equal attention it is practically impossible to catch a target.
And thats no complaining, but simply stating a fact. If a target starts to warp to a SS as soon as attackers jumps in and the attacker starts to use the directional scanner (or scanprobes) to find the target as soon as possible the attacker will only get the target if he is stuck in roids or scrambled by rats. Both which are not really highly common events. Or, better, the total time of you being warpscrambled by rats or stuck in riods is compared to the total time of you mining/ratting very small.
Essentially, right now you have as attacker rely on your own skill (using the scanner to find targets *fast* is not easy) and on missing attention of the target (because if puts in the same attention as you you will not catch it no matter how good you are).
(And to clarify this, this isn't skill countering skills, but attention countering attention & skill. Pushing the warp to button can be (and probably is) done by bots.)
Does this make the current chance distribution for predator-prey "bad"? Not really. It makes it easier for one side but considering that the predators choose between "killing and not killing" and the prey chooses between "getting killed and not getting killed" it should be easier for the prey to escape since their best scenario is only a draw.
Your position is the mirror one of mine. You think that the changes that can help the defender surviving will reduce your fun factor. As we seek two different kind of fun I dubt we will ever find a middle ground.
Question is really how much easier it should be. Should it be made "less easy" than it is now for the prey? No idea. In the long term maybe if more and more people use the most efficient escape tactics which are uncounterable, but right now, no clue.
On the other side, should it made be more easy for the prey to avoid the predator I would say thats a very bad idea however. Simply because from my personal experience, if I needed more than 2 mins to get a targets location it's in 99% of all cases too late. The only kills I got there were when my target safespotted and made an error (like staying afk uncloaked or reusing an old safespot). Predators won't get the young or diseased targets than, but only the dead ones.
Quote: Your position is the mirror one of mine.
It isn't. I am arguing to keep one central factor of eve possible. I am not arguing that killing stuff with roaming should be easier. I am arguing that it should be kept possible. Right now it's no problem to suffer near-zero death rates from roaming gangs. In the light of that I find people arguing that it should be more difficult for the attacker than it is now somewhat laughable.
Right now you basically need to be able to get to a targets location within a minute or you do not really need to bother because 99% of them will be aware of your presence by then which reduces any chance to catch them to near-zero.
Considering that (and if you do not agree there could you please say what prevents people from keeping a local chat window open or not being able to check it at least once per minute?) what do you think would happen if it is made impossible to get a target within less than 2-3 minutes?
|
Nemis Godslayer
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 05:01:00 -
[363]
Complexes - Good idea - perhaps you could add a few more. More spawns though? Gotta question that one. It's hard enough to operate by yourself in this game, let's not make it harder. Some of us play to get away from it all, including people. Now you want to make it so I HAVE to interact with others. No thanks, I'm way to anti-social for that one. Perhaps you could develop an Anti-Social Skill where it would be harder to talk to me and I could get bonuses for working alone. Maybe you could have a think where I don't even have to join a Corp. Just let me be an independent, I'll do just fine, trust me.
Asteroid belts (removing or just having them move) - Not so impressed with this one - What are they just moving though space? My Astrophysics background tells me that these are fairly static items in a solar system. Perhaps you could make some rare mineral meteoroids. You could easily justify those moving though the systems. Keep in mind a touch of reality in a science fiction game is what gives it the level of believability. Random floating rocks in space that move every day...what is this a shell game? Perhaps you could make them all in the shape of Mickey Mouse's head, then when I waste time hunting for them at least I'd get a laugh. The asteroid belt in our solar system won't be hiding behind Saturn tomorrow, no, it will be in the same spot I saw it yesterday.
Why doesn't someone at CCP look into some real problems. Like all the darned space junk out there. I've been in systems where the cans out number the rocks 2 to 1! Yet the can is nearly indestructable and you can't get rid of it EVER. I want the ability to build a ship out of them, even a small one would have more hull than my Battleship! Think about another use for that ever-so-useful Codebreaker. Now that's an under used piece of tech in the game. Want clean up all those cans in space, including the 'grandfathered' ones in .8 and better? Give us the ablity to get rid of them for you. Hacking with a code breaker and I should be able to get rid of the pesky can in space. No offense, but some of your systems are starting to look like run down storage lots. |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 06:15:00 -
[364]
Originally by: Aramendel
Latest reply 2 post above.
Put as you have put it I totally agree.
I am strongly dubtful that the removing of local as suggested will mantain the current balance.
In the end we will all wait and see what CCP decide.
|
Aramendel
Amarr Queens of the Stone Age Anarchy Empire
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 09:05:00 -
[365]
Not really removing. But changing. Local gives IMO information too easy too fast. But without it we are at the other extreme, too little information too late.
The thing is if they increase the average time you need to scramble a target from jumping in and keep local as it is they kill roaming gangs. Period. So either they have to change local or keep the times to get to a target as they are now.
Without making a high skilled cov ops pilot a requirement for any roaming gang. That would be like needing a hulk to mine *anything*.
|
Nelux
|
Posted - 2007.05.11 17:29:00 -
[366]
The whole thing with replacing complexes is fine but replacing belts is crazy is ccp trying to eradicate piracy or something cos thats what it sounds like ccp is just trying to make it harder for pvpers to find their prey and i know that if this comes into effect i will not be staying in eve for long and i have a good few acounts so im begging u ccp plz dont make a mistake as large as this cos you will lose many players
|
Josua Corel
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 21:21:00 -
[367]
Was reading through the comments and I see a couple people mentioned the lag/annoyance created by secure cans.
A possible solution to this would be a system that only allows players to have X number of cans deployed. Perhaps link this to the anchoring skill? Then implement a destroy all cans button just in case they forget where they placed them.
Also the idea of removing local player list and player number listing is a very good idea to still allow pirates to hunt ppl down. It would also encourage players to take a small gang with them when venturing into low sec to scan out pirates/defend them.
The rest of the changes sound excellent.
|
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.05.20 19:47:00 -
[368]
<--- Still waiting on Dev announcements for dedicated "Exploration" ships....
With all the new focus on exploration I find it slightly irritating that there are only 7 ships in the game that have bonuses to Astrometrics, the defining skill for probing. 3 T1 frigates and 4 Cov Ops frigates.
Where are our exploration vessels? As far as I remember Jaques Costeau didn't sail around in a converted sub-hunter or survellience ship.... <-----------> Factional Warefare:
The LowSec wars which never happened. |
Callthetruth
Caldari Logical Logtistics
|
Posted - 2007.05.21 04:17:00 -
[369]
more numerous placed complex site for starters esp calderi space
|
HAL 9000
|
Posted - 2007.05.22 20:17:00 -
[370]
These sound like good changes on the whole to me. As others have said, mostly I'm concerned that my exploration skills will still have "value" -- that I'll be able to distinguish an "easy" site from a "hard" find. The dev responses do suggest we'll be able to make that distinction; I just hope it's clear. It would be a bummer to spend an hour chasing a cosmic signal that turns out to be veldspar -- or, conversely, to find 15 newbs at the supposedly hidden belt I worked hard to discover.
|
|
d026
THE LEGION OF STEEL WARRIORS.... R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.06.04 01:17:00 -
[371]
Quote: My take is that the ideal situation would be one in which small PvP gangs can actually go out and find other small PvP gangs to engage rather than being reduced to just hunting NPCers - more challenge, more adrenaline, more fun. How we get there, I'm not sure yet, but if we can increase the number of small PvP gangs roaming around at any given time I'm hopeful that this will reduce the reliance on hunting NPCers for small gangs, which will in turn make this a less pressing issue and make the design for this change easier.
YEAH WOW BG!!!111
|
Astraal Forever
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 17:22:00 -
[372]
You mean ruined stations, stargates, repair/mining/manufacturing etc. outposts (ancient? ...) entangled through asteroids, guarded by NPCs which deserves high searching with scanners? Great idea! But there's something i wonder and somehow dislike... If it's going to be like in deadspaces, will the NPCs respawn only after downtime? Won't it be better like... 1:30, 2:00 hours interval since last kill? And don't remove all belts and deads, keep some of them. I can't wait to see this! Good luck!
|
Kaaii
Caldari Equilibrium LLC FATAL Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 22:06:00 -
[373]
Will gas cloud (re: booster mfg) be allowed to be found in more than "just a few" constellations now? Talking about 0.0.
It would be nice to include some of the gas content explorations sites with gas clouds of various types WITH skill/module availability of some sort.
Something id like to see anyway, regardless of what region I currently reside in...
"Id rather fall beside 10 Lions, than stand with 1000 sheep.."
Trading 101
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] [13]:: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |