EVE Search - Why is CCP trying to destroy Tactical Warfare?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why is CCP trying to destroy Tactical Warfare?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:00:00 - [1] The latest things coming out of the test server are frankly disturbing. Bombs that have area effect against other targets? Jump portals for the POS? How many carebears are on CCPs staff these days? Bombs are going to eliminate tactical warfare with small ships. Mixed fleet? Muhahahaha .. Ill target the BS right by you and instapop ya with 15 bombs. Do the devs at CCP ever think of how this is going to be used? I envision fleets of large battleships firing off 40 or 50 bombs at once, blasting anything smaller than a battleship and warping off. That will of course NOT reduce blobs but just create blobs of bombing battleships. A screwup not matched since the 11km/s nanophoon. And if that isnt enough, lets just put a chain of POS in a 0.0 area and put jump portals on them. Carriers fuelign POSes wasnt enough, now we have to build them in the POS that way there can be no POSSIBLE way of logistical warfare in Eve unless you are a superalliance. Whats next? The uber sword of green jade doom? CCP is diverging further and further from a tactically motivated game in futile attempts to nerf the blob. It will never work and in the process they are hosing the game for the people that like to use tactics. So much for light, fast moving fleets. Everyone without a tech 2 fitted BS ... POP. Really CCP, sometimes I wonder if you have any developers that being up the possibility of unintended consequences. Is the culture so bad that people are not allowed to bring out dissenting views? The accounting department says we need bombs so we do? We now have POS guns outside shields, jump portals and bombs and I seriously doubt even one fo the devs has given ANY thought to how they will be used more than how they are INTENDED to be used. The bane of CCP devs, not thinking. Isnt it time you learned how to fight back?
SiJira	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:20:00 - [2] First ! the jump portal thing is the stupidest idea there is ____ __ ________ _sig below_ the jet cans are made so that people that dont mine can get free ore miners ritually donate the ore to anyone wishing to take some
Zell Shadowcast	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:23:00 - [3] bombs dont hurt small ships if you bothered to read the description
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:32:00 - [4] Originally by: Zell Shadowcast bombs dont hurt small ships if you bothered to read the description Did YOU read the description? It only says yit cant "target" small ships. So shoot the gate with 10 frigs orbiting it or shoot the battleship in a mixed fleet and pop a bunch of his support. Everyone go get in your BS because that is the only thing that is going to survive. Also it wont solve sniper fleets as you will have 2 fleets of bomb huirlers instead. Isnt it time you learned how to fight back?
Xeliya Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:32:00 - [5] From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. Next is this is on the test server, there has been a lot of items put onto that server and never made it on to Tranquillity. So just because it is there does not mean it is an actual planned change. One of the best ways to improve a product is it to try out new stuff and see what the feedback is. Also posting in a constrictive feedback type of way in the development forum would get you a lot further.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:34:00 - [6] Originally by: Zell Shadowcast bombs dont hurt small ships if you bothered to read the description "has a slow firing rate and has difficulty targeting small, fast ships" is not saying "doesn't hurt small ships". You target a big slow ship, and kill all the small fast ships in the immediate vicinity. We don't just read the description, we think about it as well ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:36:00 - [7] Originally by: Xeliya From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. Next is this is on the test server, there has been a lot of items put onto that server and never made it on to Tranquillity. So just because it is there does not mean it is an actual planned change. One of the best ways to improve a product is it to try out new stuff and see what the feedback is. Also posting in a constrictive feedback type of way in the development forum would get you a lot further. Nothing indicates that. It seems this is a POS deployed structure and there have been lots of things reported to be borked on the test server that make it to production anyway. Finally stastical analysis would show that the most things get changed through complaining on the general forum and causing a stink than posting constructive on the Features and Ideas forum. There have been numerous case studies cited of things reported for months on the constructivvce ways and never fixed and then after being posted in frustration here, they get fixed. Unfortunately you have to complain to get anythign done. Isnt it time you learned how to fight back?
arthell Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:37:00 - [8] The Railgun of a Thousand Truths! Crowd: Aaaahhhhhhhh
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:42:00 - [9] Originally by: Xeliya From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. If EVE has taught me anything, it's that people don't get what they deserve, they get what happens to them. The question is not "Do the alliances deserve to keep what they've got" - the question is "In what way does this change the game experience, and is that a change for the better?" Reducing the vulnerabilities of the large alliances is a good way to reduce the amount of change that goes on. Allowing the large alliances to quickly move their fleets into position will increase the number of pilots they can bring to a big battle. POS jump portals are a step towards a more static game, and bigger blobs. Personally, I don't think that's good change. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Xeliya Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:44:00 - [10] Edited by: Xeliya on 11/05/2007 04:43:16 Originally by: Rells Nothing indicates that. It seems this is a POS deployed structure and there have been lots of things reported to be borked on the test server that make it to production anyway. Finally stastical analysis would show that the most things get changed through complaining on the general forum and causing a stink than posting constructive on the Features and Ideas forum. There have been numerous case studies cited of things reported for months on the constructivvce ways and never fixed and then after being posted in frustration here, they get fixed. Unfortunately you have to complain to get anythign done. Yes it is a POS deployed structure, and I have yet to take a look at it but other new POS mods like the cyno jammer (sov 3), cyno gen (sov 2) require higher levels of sov. Originally by: BluOrange If EVE has taught me anything, it's that people don't get what they deserve, they get what happens to them. The question is not "Do the alliances deserve to keep what they've got" - the question is "In what way does this change the game experience, and is that a change for the better?" Reducing the vulnerabilities of the large alliances is a good way to reduce the amount of change that goes on. Allowing the large alliances to quickly move their fleets into position will increase the number of pilots they can bring to a big battle. POS jump portals are a step towards a more static game, and bigger blobs. Personally, I don't think that's good change. If a large alliance wants to build 3 outposts in 20 constellations so they may have this ability across an entire region props to them because one day they will lose it all one day as their land value will have the eyes of thousands looking upon it.
Cpt Lain Caldari Agony Unleashed	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:46:00 - [11] Originally by: arthell The Railgun of a Thousand Truths! Crowd: Aaaahhhhhhhh "It has an area of effect 20km 250 energy neut effect, while also disabling all offensive weaponry and increasing boost/rep times by 50%! It was considered too powerful for anyone ever to use, ever!" There are some interesting and IMO useful things on the test server, but there is a LOT of incredibly broken, tactic-killing devices.
Zell Shadowcast	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:53:00 - [12] hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information!
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:55:00 - [13] Edited by: BluOrange on 11/05/2007 04:51:48 Originally by: Xeliya Originally by: BluOrange If EVE has taught me anything, it's that people don't get what they deserve, they get what happens to them. The question is not "Do the alliances deserve to keep what they've got" - the question is "In what way does this change the game experience, and is that a change for the better?" Reducing the vulnerabilities of the large alliances is a good way to reduce the amount of change that goes on. Allowing the large alliances to quickly move their fleets into position will increase the number of pilots they can bring to a big battle. POS jump portals are a step towards a more static game, and bigger blobs. Personally, I don't think that's good change. If a large alliance wants to build 3 outposts in each of their 20 constellations (60 outposts) so they may have this ability across an entire region props to them because one day they will lose it all one day as their land value will have the eyes of thousands looking upon it. Now we don't even know if it will go beyond the borders of a constellation. So until we get to test it why are we complaining already? It's on the test server - it gives a five light-year range, and would allow an established alliance to use freighters to fuel their poses, without exposing those freighters to the hazards of travel through normal gates. So it's a massive win for the mega-alliances in terms of allowing them to consolidate their pos networks. The question is not whether this ability would be hard-earned and somehow morally virtuous. The question is whether the impact on the game experience is positive or negative. If you want a more static game with bigger blobs, this is a good change. I don't want a more static game, and I don't want bigger blobs. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Zell Shadowcast	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:57:00 - [14] mods rename this thread to 'agony unleashed whinefest' thanks
Corporati Capitalis	Posted - 2007.05.11 04:58:00 - [15] So where are these new bombs and POS structures on the test server? I looked around in the market but couldn't find them.
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:03:00 - [16] Im sure these new bombs will be based on signature radius. The smaller ships will have a smaller sig radius, so they wont take as much damage. Also if you dont want want to take damage from the new aoe weapons you will spread out, and not be concentrated in a blob. If someone does decide to blob with these new aoe weapons, they will lose more ships, if they spread out into smaller groups. The impact of aoe weapons will be much less. Also as far as the sovereignty requirements, ccp is trying to reduce how effectively 1 alliance can control a large area. They want alliances instead to focus on developing smaller areas of land, on a much larger scale. CCP is adding alot more resources (such as the new missions, and the exploration) to 0.0 so the systems can support more players (currently 1 system can support about 10people, and thats getting pretty crowded). If a single system can support 50 active players, and it is highly developed. Then it will be more convenient for people to operate in smaller ares.
Tsanse Kinske WeMeanYouKnowHarm	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:11:00 - [17] Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! * * * In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -Douglas Adams, writing about EVE
Lusulpher	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:20:00 - [18] Originally by: BluOrange Edited by: BluOrange on 11/05/2007 04:51:48 Originally by: Xeliya Originally by: BluOrange If EVE has taught me anything, it's that people don't get what they deserve, they get what happens to them. The question is not "Do the alliances deserve to keep what they've got" - the question is "In what way does this change the game experience, and is that a change for the better?" Reducing the vulnerabilities of the large alliances is a good way to reduce the amount of change that goes on. Allowing the large alliances to quickly move their fleets into position will increase the number of pilots they can bring to a big battle. POS jump portals are a step towards a more static game, and bigger blobs. Personally, I don't think that's good change. If a large alliance wants to build 3 outposts in each of their 20 constellations (60 outposts) so they may have this ability across an entire region props to them because one day they will lose it all one day as their land value will have the eyes of thousands looking upon it. Now we don't even know if it will go beyond the borders of a constellation. So until we get to test it why are we complaining already? It's on the test server - it gives a five light-year range, and would allow an established alliance to use freighters to fuel their poses, without exposing those freighters to the hazards of travel through normal gates. So it's a massive win for the mega-alliances in terms of allowing them to consolidate their pos networks. The question is not whether this ability would be hard-earned and somehow morally virtuous. The question is whether the impact on the game experience is positive or negative. If you want a more static game with bigger blobs, this is a good change. I don't want a more static game, and I don't want bigger blobs. Ok,I'm a carebear who would drool for that kind of low-risk/hi-security change. But that's a little too far. This would be a massive advantage for the well-seated mega-alliances indeed. O_O There would rarely be a shift on the EVE map if this takes off, that's called a static game folks...
Kristoffer Amarr Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:21:00 - [19] Edited by: Kristoffer on 11/05/2007 05:21:38 Edited by: Kristoffer on 11/05/2007 05:20:46 Edited by: Kristoffer on 11/05/2007 05:18:30 Originally by: ghosttr Im sure these new bombs will be based on signature radius. The smaller ships will have a smaller sig radius, so they wont take as much damage. Also if you dont want want to take damage from the new aoe weapons you will spread out, and not be concentrated in a blob. If someone does decide to blob with these new aoe weapons, they will lose more ships, if they spread out into smaller groups. The impact of aoe weapons will be much less. Way to nerf remote reps for the few that actually use them to good effect. Tbh, a blob doesn't have to be blobbed up in a small ball for it to be a blob, it merely needs to be an unorganized mass of ships firing at a primary. They can be spread all around a gate, but as far as the definition of a blob goes, its still a blob, forcing them to disperse is going to change nothing at all.
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:28:00 - [20] Originally by: Kristoffer Edited by: Kristoffer on 11/05/2007 05:20:46 Edited by: Kristoffer on 11/05/2007 05:18:30 Originally by: ghosttr Im sure these new bombs will be based on signature radius. The smaller ships will have a smaller sig radius, so they wont take as much damage. Also if you dont want want to take damage from the new aoe weapons you will spread out, and not be concentrated in a blob. If someone does decide to blob with these new aoe weapons, they will lose more ships, if they spread out into smaller groups. The impact of aoe weapons will be much less. Way to nerf remote reps for the few that actually use them to good effect. Tbh, a blob doesn't have to be blobbed up in a small ball for it to be a blob, it merely needs to be an unorganized mass of ships firing at a primary. They can be spread all around a gate, but as far as the definition of a blob goes, its still a blob. Which will make it so we see more logistics ships in combat. Logistics ships are rarely used in most fleet battles, and it would be a good decision for a logistics to be better at its job than a bs.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:35:00 - [21] Originally by: Corporati Capitalis So where are these new bombs and POS structures on the test server? I looked around in the market but couldn't find them. Sorry, I made a mistake. The screenshots I was looking at were released by T20, they're not online on the test server at this point, so they're developer access only atm. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:40:00 - [22] Originally by: ghosttr Im sure these new bombs will be based on signature radius. The smaller ships will have a smaller sig radius, so they wont take as much damage. Also if you dont want want to take damage from the new aoe weapons you will spread out, and not be concentrated in a blob. If someone does decide to blob with these new aoe weapons, they will lose more ships, if they spread out into smaller groups. The impact of aoe weapons will be much less. They'll still be on the same grid, still cause just as much lag. Fleet battles will produce more casualties for the side coming through the gate, nothing else will change. AoE weapons make the real blobbing problem (too many people in the same system) worse, by fixing the fake blobbing problem ('powerballs'). Quote: Also as far as the sovereignty requirements, ccp is trying to reduce how effectively 1 alliance can control a large area. They want alliances instead to focus on developing smaller areas of land, on a much larger scale. CCP is adding alot more resources (such as the new missions, and the exploration) to 0.0 so the systems can support more players (currently 1 system can support about 10people, and thats getting pretty crowded). If a single system can support 50 active players, and it is highly developed. Then it will be more convenient for people to operate in smaller ares. That's a great goal, that I fully support. POS jumpgates will send the game in the opposite direction. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 05:48:00 - [23] Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! Let's be clear about this. Bombs are bad. They're not going to kill Eve dead - we're already developing tactics that use bombs and counter-bomb tactics as we;;. If it does get implemented, there's a damn good chance that these AoE weapons will make Agony stronger, not weaker. But our position is that they are bad for the game, because they encourage blobbing (in a strategic sense) and because they mean that combined-arms deployments will be seriously devalued. Sniper deployments change from being 'extremely powerful' to 'winbuttons'. Tech 3, factional warfare, improvements to the wallet - these things are great, bring 'em on! Not that Agony is likely to participate in factional warfare, but it looks cool, and might encourage more people to take part in small-gang engagements. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:10:00 - [24] Edited by: ghosttr on 11/05/2007 06:09:50 Originally by: BluOrange Quote: Originally by: ghosttr Im sure these new bombs will be based on signature radius. The smaller ships will have a smaller sig radius, so they wont take as much damage. Also if you dont want want to take damage from the new aoe weapons you will spread out, and not be concentrated in a blob. If someone does decide to blob with these new aoe weapons, they will lose more ships, if they spread out into smaller groups. The impact of aoe weapons will be much less. They'll still be on the same grid, still cause just as much lag. Fleet battles will produce more casualties for the side coming through the gate, nothing else will change. AoE weapons make the real blobbing problem (too many people in the same system) worse, by fixing the fake blobbing problem ('powerballs'). I think it attempts to address the effectiveness of many ships instapopping a primary. Attempting to split apart the one huge blob, into several smaller groups (which will have to choose targets seperately, and not be able to focus on the same guy). Im all for living longer in fleet battles.. I think some of these sov ideas will help move combat away from gates too. Reducing the lag caused by gatefire (its the gate cloaking/uncloaking that causes the lag i believe) On the lag side of things, If you have ever fought out of the range of a gate, things move alot smoother. SO gate guns/ system defenses make it so that a hidden spot (such as the new belts) will be a better spot for pvp b/c the enemy can evade your automated defenses there. Quote: Quote: Also as far as the sovereignty requirements, ccp is trying to reduce how effectively 1 alliance can control a large area. They want alliances instead to focus on developing smaller areas of land, on a much larger scale. CCP is adding alot more resources (such as the new missions, and the exploration) to 0.0 so the systems can support more players (currently 1 system can support about 10people, and thats getting pretty crowded). If a single system can support 50 active players, and it is highly developed. Then it will be more convenient for people to operate in smaller ares. That's a great goal, that I fully support. POS jumpgates will send the game in the opposite direction. This depends on how they are implemented. IF they use fuel, have high fitting requirements (so they wont be online if the pos goes into reinforced) and can only transport non-capital ships, and requiring a high level of sovereignty. IF you put 100's of billions of isk into developing a constellation, then i think that they could be useful. Just as long as CCP tries to keep them so they cannot be directly involved in combat, either via expenses or otherwise. Like if you are seiging a pos, and the enemy fleet comes through the portal during the siege, that would not be cool. But if you can amass in system a, and use it to get to system e (where the hostiles are), bypassing system b, c, & d, then it would be ok, and allow you to patrol your sovereign space more effectively (b/c hostiles shouldn't be able to wander about your sovereign space with any amount of ease)
Kristoffer Amarr Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:26:00 - [25] Its totally going in the wrong direction. ECM is chance based, so remote ECM will most likely be chance based. That means more people with remote ECM = more chances of jamming the enemy gang, so have more people with remote ECM than your enemy and your set. It only is going to make the blob with the most remote ECM win.
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:40:00 - [26] Originally by: Kristoffer Way to nerf remote reps for the few that actually use them to good effect. Tbh, a blob doesn't have to be blobbed up in a small ball for it to be a blob, it merely needs to be an unorganized mass of ships firing at a primary. They can be spread all around a gate, but as far as the definition of a blob goes, its still a blob, forcing them to disperse is going to change nothing at all. Isn't there a ship that nobody uses right now that helps with your problem? Actually, I'm sure it's a whole class of ship that's supposed to be used for exactly this reason. What were they called again? Jeez if I can't remember. Logistics? was that it? - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:47:00 - [27] Originally by: ghosttr Originally by: BluOrange Quote: Also as far as the sovereignty requirements, ccp is trying to reduce how effectively 1 alliance can control a large area. .... That's a great goal, that I fully support. POS jumpgates will send the game in the opposite direction. This depends on how they are implemented. IF they use fuel, have high fitting requirements (so they wont be online if the pos goes into reinforced) and can only transport non-capital ships, and requiring a high level of sovereignty. IF you put 100's of billions of isk into developing a constellation, then i think that they could be useful. I'm not disputing that a POS jumpgate would be useful. If I had the requirements to install one, I'd do it the day they become available. What I'm saying is that they will make the game more static and they will encourage blobbing. Quote: Just as long as CCP tries to keep them so they cannot be directly involved in combat, either via expenses or otherwise. Like if you are seiging a pos, and the enemy fleet comes through the portal during the siege, that would not be cool. But if you can amass in system a, and use it to get to system e (where the hostiles are), bypassing system b, c, & d, then it would be ok, and allow you to patrol your sovereign space more effectively (b/c hostiles shouldn't be able to wander about your sovereign space with any amount of ease) It doesn't help you patrol your space. It does help you to deploy a large number of ships to the place where you want them, once your patrol detects a threat. Ie, they allow you to use your ships in bigger formations. Ie, they encourage blobbing. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2007.05.11 06:54:00 - [28] Originally by: Rells The latest things coming out of the test server are frankly disturbing. Bombs that have area effect against other targets? Jump portals for the POS? How many carebears are on CCPs staff these days? Bombs are going to eliminate tactical warfare with small ships. Mixed fleet? Muhahahaha .. Ill target the BS right by you and instapop ya with 15 bombs. Do the devs at CCP ever think of how this is going to be used? I envision fleets of large battleships firing off 40 or 50 bombs at once, blasting anything smaller than a battleship and warping off. That will of course NOT reduce blobs but just create blobs of bombing battleships. A screwup not matched since the 11km/s nanophoon. And if that isnt enough, lets just put a chain of POS in a 0.0 area and put jump portals on them. Carriers fuelign POSes wasnt enough, now we have to build them in the POS that way there can be no POSSIBLE way of logistical warfare in Eve unless you are a superalliance. Whats next? The uber sword of green jade doom? CCP is diverging further and further from a tactically motivated game in futile attempts to nerf the blob. It will never work and in the process they are hosing the game for the people that like to use tactics. So much for light, fast moving fleets. Everyone without a tech 2 fitted BS ... POP. Really CCP, sometimes I wonder if you have any developers that being up the possibility of unintended consequences. Is the culture so bad that people are not allowed to bring out dissenting views? The accounting department says we need bombs so we do? We now have POS guns outside shields, jump portals and bombs and I seriously doubt even one fo the devs has given ANY thought to how they will be used more than how they are INTENDED to be used. The bane of CCP devs, not thinking. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." That's all I can say about that. One thing CCP did not get right is to listen to their community. It's the strongest element in the game, however they do only listen sometimes when things get horribly broken. Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.05.11 07:00:00 - [29] Has anybody even PAUSED to think about this first ? You know, try to remember stuff that was talked about and such ? And maybe think it's still very much on the drawing board, and that CONTRARY to some people's beliefs, CCP isn't stupid. First off, the BOMBS. How much are you willing to bet against me on a friendly wager ? You recall the talks about giving an actual strategic role for stealthbombers ? And the talk about area-of-effect huge warheads ? I'm betting they'll be stealth bomber only. Second thing, soveraignty levels. You're whining about "oh noes, alliance X can defend its space with less effort, h4x!". But what about the huge investment in pilot manhours and billions of ISK that it would take to SLIGHTLY improve security in a SMALL piece of the galaxy ? And god forbid you sneeze and miss the 2-3 months needed for all of this to get into effect, you know, by accident, and there would be nothing you can do about it. Sometimes it makes me wonder, do I also post such stupid stuff when I'm angry and in a hurry ? _ MySkills \| Module/Rig stacknerfing explained
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 07:13:00 - [30] Originally by: Akita T Has anybody even PAUSED to think about this first ? You know, try to remember stuff that was talked about and such ? And maybe think it's still very much on the drawing board, and that CONTRARY to some people's beliefs, CCP isn't stupid. I'm not saying they're stupid. I'm saying they're wrong. Quote: First off, the BOMBS. How much are you willing to bet against me on a friendly wager ? You recall the talks about giving an actual strategic role for stealthbombers ? And the talk about area-of-effect huge warheads ? I'm betting they'll be stealth bomber only. I'll take that bet, I've looked at the screenshots. Bomb launchers are highslot items that take 60 grid and 10 cpu. So there's no '99% cpu reduction for bomb launchers' needed to fit those babies. Quote: Second thing, soveraignty levels. You're whining about "oh noes, alliance X can defend its space with less effort, h4x!". But what about the huge investment in pilot manhours and billions of ISK that it would take to SLIGHTLY improve security in a SMALL piece of the galaxy ? People have been saying that the way to go after the major alliances is to attack their supply lines. With POS jump portals, their supply lines just became immune to attack. This is a bad change because it will lead to a more static game and more blobbing. Quote: And god forbid you sneeze and miss the 2-3 months needed for all of this to get into effect, you know, by accident, and there would be nothing you can do about it. Perhaps it's naive and optimistic, but maybe if we kick up a stink before they go ahead with this bad plan, they might reconsider it. We could always wait until it goes into production, like they did with the nanophoon. Quote: Sometimes it makes me wonder, do I also post such stupid stuff when I'm angry and in a hurry ? That's one reason why I'm reluctant to make judgements like that about people. Saves me from embarrassment when they turn out not to be idiots, after all. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Goran StarRider	Posted - 2007.05.11 07:27:00 - [31] Edited by: Goran StarRider on 11/05/2007 07:23:57 These weekly "sky is falling" posts from you are getting pretty tiring. Who says CCP is unaware of the law of unintended consequences? That's not a reason to not implement changes to the game. They deal with the unintended consequences as they arise, they don't let the fear of them paralyze them from action. And stop acting like your predictions as to what these changes will bring are a foregone conclusion. You aren't the grand seer of EVE. I'm sure you will dismiss the following arguments because they don't coincide with what you've already convinced yourself of, but here goes: First, you are making gigantic assumptions about bombs with pretty much no information. You just assume that they will have the same affect on surrounding ships regardless of size. You have no basis for saying that besides the fact that your feeble little mind can't envision any type of AOE weapon other than a smartbomb. All they need to do is make the explosion velocity really low and the explosion radius really high and all small/medium ships will be fine as long they keep moving. This would make fleets of small ships even more effective because once they engaged BSs at close range the BSs would be damaging themselves more than their enemies with the bombs. Second, jump bridges require level 3 sovereignty, which will require 35 days of constant sovereignty. And, as anyone familiar with POS warfare can tell you (and no, killing one POS doesn't count), maintaining a POS with sovereignty (meaning a giant neon sign telling everyone you have a POS there) in a system outside of your main area of control is not an easy feat. It will be a gigantic target, especially since everyone will know it will be used for logistical purposes. Additionally, the jump bridges will be anchored outside the POS shields, so roving gangs will be able to strike and them and potentially take them out without having to destroy the POS. This will create more tactical warfare because there will be actual hit & run tactics that can be utilized against POSs instead of keeping POSs completely untouchable except by capital ships. Finally, if you really think CCP is too stupid to comprehend 50 BSs with bomb launchers then quit the f-ing game already and spare us from your constant whining, because apparently the devs are so mentally feeble they will probably die shortly from forgetting to breathe. Just because devs don't flock to your posts to tell you what a genius you are doesn't mean they don't read them. And just because they don't capitulate to your incessant whining and cancel features they've spent months developing and balancing doesn't mean they don't recognize the issues you raise and are simply too mentally feeble to come to the same conclusions.
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2007.05.11 07:46:00 - [32] Originally by: Goran StarRider First, you are making gigantic assumptions about bombs with pretty much no information. You just assume that they will have the same affect on surrounding ships regardless of size. You have no basis for saying that besides the fact that your feeble little mind can't envision any type of AOE weapon other than a smartbomb. All they need to do is make the explosion velocity really low and the explosion radius really high and all small/medium ships will be fine as long they keep moving. This would make fleets of small ships even more effective because once they engaged BSs at close range the BSs would be damaging themselves more than their enemies with the bombs. Oh yes we can, we have the Doomsday devices remember ? No AoE weapon currently in game has something like explosion radius/velocity. I think Rells CAN tell you what the properties on the bombs were and if they included anything like that. If not, there you have your answer. Obviously you DO implement a new item with all the things you think it should have, so if there's no radius/velocity, you lost. I do not think Rells is that stupid to post when he would think the draft he saw would be ok in the current state of the game. Truth is, he can't see all Devs intentions, but sometimes neither the Devs do. Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
Chewan Mesa coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.11 08:04:00 - [33] Edited by: Chewan Mesa on 11/05/2007 08:02:21 Once the POS-warfare has been redesigned, I believe jump bridges are actually going to add to tactical warfare in EVE. If they do not require constellation sov to be used, you will have a row of POSs claiming sov in otherwise prolly useless systems, which will be easy enough to figure out using scouts/spies/intel. Now, having them placed outside the shields, it means that you dont have to catch a load of freighters running into an alliances space with cargo, but that you can prepare assaults on maybe 4 different POSs to take out their jump bridge. Add to that the fact that it still means freighters have to move into 0.0 first, to the first jump bridge. Should it use constellation sov though, it limits its use even further. I expect it to use quite a bunch of fuel as well, so there wont be any 10-man gangs using their jump-portal to run from a roaming gang of hostiles.
Khajit Smitty Minmatar MisFunk Inc. Frontline.	Posted - 2007.05.11 08:30:00 - [34] Really rells, you are an idiot! Do you even understand the design/brainstorming sessions around a feature? Do you honestly think a feature is implemented because "its cool" without analysing it, discussing it, drawing up impact plans etc on present features. Your little rant screams child, i suggest you get to understand game development and more about a working environment before posting the dribble you did. The information at the moment is so limited, we dont know how it all works/ties together so honestly one cannot made statements on how it will impact the game.
Ares Lightfeather	Posted - 2007.05.11 09:41:00 - [35] Just as a side note : a simple solution to your problem would be to make the bomb destroyable while in flight. If targetting the bomb in flight is made easy by smaller ships (like frigates) and difficult by strongest one, it would mean more strategic fleet warfare. As in other games, to destroy a capital ship with an escort, you send your capital ship with an escort. And whichever battle is lost (either the "escort-level" fight or the "capital-level" fight) means that the entire battle is lost. Whining is useless. You've got a problem ? put your mind to work, and find a solution.
Kazuo Ishiguro	Posted - 2007.05.11 10:41:00 - [36] Could someone please provide links so that I can see what the OP is so worried about? ------ Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant tanking

CCP Oveur	Posted - 2007.05.11 10:59:00 - [37] Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational wallet! Senior Producer EVE Online

Goran StarRider	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:06:00 - [38] Edited by: Goran StarRider on 11/05/2007 11:08:41 This is what Rells is freaking out about: http://eve-files.com/dl/104527 And as you can see, its clearly based on a missile-type weapon, not a smartbomb or doomsday device. I'm not saying it will necessarily have all the properties of a missile. But assuming its a mini-DD is completely ridiculous since this is the only piece of information currently available. And Rells is the kind of person to flip out without having all the facts, which is what is so annoying about his whine-fests. EDIT: Of course EVE files seems to be f-ed up right now. Hopefully this new link works better.
SamuraiJack Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:20:00 - [39] Originally by: Xeliya From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. Next is this is on the test server, there has been a lot of items put onto that server and never made it on to Tranquillity. So just because it is there does not mean it is an actual planned change. One of the best ways to improve a product is it to try out new stuff and see what the feedback is. Also posting in a constrictive feedback type of way in the development forum would get you a lot further. /Cynical on. Sooo... CCP finally adds in the stuff they promised us nearly a year ago... Conviently after BoB wiped out ASCN and installs their pets. The very things that would have helped us maintain a region. Good fracking job boys. And between that and the slide of EvE into griefing whining CS in space you wonder why you have a PR problem. /cynical. John Smiths. Its a drink you know. SJ. CLS Co-CEO and Standings Director =-

Redundancy	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:24:00 - [40] Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts.

Biltic Creen Minmatar Deutsche Minen und Werke Guardian Federation	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:30:00 - [41] Originally by: Redundancy Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts. Rells: You just got served _____ This post is not my personal opinion. It does represent the standpoint of every single player !
Ling Xiao Prism Project Technologies	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:31:00 - [42] I saw that ninja edit! Dev pwnage at lunchtime - Eve ftw __________ If you think the game is rigged, why are you still playing?
Simon Barrow Basgerin Hounds	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:41:00 - [43] Originally by: Ling Xiao I saw that ninja edit! Dev pwnage at lunchtime - Eve ftw The ninja edit was fast and nice, liked the first version better :)
Hugh Ruka Caldari	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:44:00 - [44] Originally by: Goran StarRider Edited by: Goran StarRider on 11/05/2007 11:08:41 This is what Rells is freaking out about: http://eve-files.com/dl/104527 And as you can see, its clearly based on a missile-type weapon, not a smartbomb or doomsday device. I'm not saying it will necessarily have all the properties of a missile. But assuming its a mini-DD is completely ridiculous since this is the only piece of information currently available. And Rells is the kind of person to flip out without having all the facts, which is what is so annoying about his whine-fests. EDIT: Of course EVE files seems to be f-ed up right now. Hopefully this new link works better. Thanks for the link, however there are 2 things: 1. a BS class module with 60TF/10PG ? I can jack them on a caracal. 2. no information on the actual bomb, only the launcher Anyway the Bomb ECM charge seems nice, looks like we get rid of ECM bursts ? One suggestion, if this will be as you say ship limited (explosion velocity/radius etc.) then we'll see frig bombing raids on larger ships. Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
Awox Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:52:00 - [45] Originally by: Redundancy Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts. I'm sorry, what. I'm not going to call the developers idiots, but a lot of new things in EVE show-up broken.. what game do you play? - BOOST OUTLAWS (-10.0 and proud of it)
Cryten Jones Gallente Infinite Development Consortium	Posted - 2007.05.11 11:55:00 - [46] Originally by: Hugh Ruka One suggestion, if this will be as you say ship limited (explosion velocity/radius etc.) then we'll see frig bombing raids on larger ships. Humm, new bonus to Stealth Bombers I feel 95 - 95% reduction in fitting requirments of bomb launchers. -CJ
Matrix Aran Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:01:00 - [47] Edited by: Matrix Aran on 11/05/2007 12:03:30 Originally by: CCP Oveur Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational wallet! Sig material! ----
SamuraiJack Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:01:00 - [48] Bombs afaik will be Stealth Bomber only. I recall a dev blog about it some time ago. Makes them usefull for this. The sov changes... I reserve judgement on but I'll say this. ASCN saw this coming and if it had been put in game we'd be in a seriously strong position now. We had the outposts there for full Constilation Sov. I am severly dissapointed in CCP for the delays implementing this and other late "promises". I'm not sure i like the putting stuff outside shields. Or the turrets being controled by players. Does this mean you have to be online to control your guns? Do they auto target if no-one is on? Admittedly this makes drivebys on pos's easier but... what happens if your friendly gankers dual DD the pos. all your structures outside die instantly? This is a pretty damn major change. I'll give BoB their due. Perfectly played. They now have the lead in supercaps. Feyth will be a fortress, so no going in that way. The Northern way in is held by a substantial buffer. You'll not be able to shift them from Delve now. Nice little ISK earner. Welcome to being a 2nd class citizen in eve. SJ. CLS Co-CEO and Standings Director =-
Riddick Valer	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:01:00 - [49] I worry about bombs. While they are hard to target small ships, what to stop someone from having a BS at the gate tanked against that type of bomb? The blob just keeps a constant lock on their own BS and bombs it whenever someone jumps in. Completely removes any locking time considerations.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:02:00 - [50] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 11/05/2007 12:01:46 Originally by: Matrix Aran Originally by: CCP Oveur Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational wallet! Sig material! Your sig doesnt seem to have enough room for his wallet. That reminds me... perhaps we could get more sig space? I can have like 3 links in my sig if Im lucky. I want more! Please? :) --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune
Shadowsword Kermit Space Industies	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:06:00 - [51] Originally by: Redundancy Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts. I don't think anyone here really believe you guys at CCP are idiots, and I agree that the OP was way too agressive, but then, you created POS warfare and Doomsdays, and the consequences of those two features were highly previsibles. Speaking of which, everyone in CCP seems pretty carefull to avoid speaking about titans. Are you fearing a ***-storm? ------------------------------------------ A big nuke may be nice in a strategy game, but something like this in a game where every unit is a player, and each death costly, is insane.*
Matrix Aran Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:06:00 - [52] Originally by: Jim McGregor Edited by: Jim McGregor on 11/05/2007 12:01:46 Originally by: Matrix Aran Originally by: CCP Oveur Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational wallet! Sig material! Your sig doesnt seem to have enough room for his wallet. That reminds me... perhaps we could get more sig space? I can have like 3 links in my sig if Im lucky. I want more! Please? :) Boost Sigs! ----
Nicholas Barker Caldari Black Bands	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:08:00 - [53] Originally by: Kristoffer Way to nerf remote reps for the few that actually use them to good effect. Tbh, a blob doesn't have to be blobbed up in a small ball for it to be a blob, it merely needs to be an unorganized mass of ships firing at a primary. They can be spread all around a gate, but as far as the definition of a blob goes, its still a blob, forcing them to disperse is going to change nothing at all. i believe the word blob comes from the old days where you could see an enemy fleet approaching by the massive blob they made on the map. --- - We lost that fight - Quick, smack'em in local or they'll think they won!
ALPHA12125 Gallente 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:11:00 - [54] Edited by: ALPHA12125 on 11/05/2007 12:09:21 Originally by: SamuraiJack Originally by: Xeliya From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. Next is this is on the test server, there has been a lot of items put onto that server and never made it on to Tranquillity. So just because it is there does not mean it is an actual planned change. One of the best ways to improve a product is it to try out new stuff and see what the feedback is. Also posting in a constrictive feedback type of way in the development forum would get you a lot further. /Cynical on. Sooo... CCP finally adds in the stuff they promised us nearly a year ago... Conviently after BoB wiped out ASCN and installs their pets. The very things that would have helped us maintain a region. Good fracking job boys. And between that and the slide of EvE into griefing whining CS in space you wonder why you have a PR problem. /cynical. John Smiths. Its a drink you know. not even a doomsdaydevice on every gate in ascn territory would have saved you.
Hawk Fireblade	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:19:00 - [55] Edited by: Hawk Fireblade on 11/05/2007 12:19:27 This relates to the utterly inadequate fitting system, which myself and others have been trying to get them to sort since beta. Rather than overly simplistic pwr/cpu every ship should only be able to fit a certain number of any given item and a total overhaul of the fitting system and game balance is required not the constant bodging they've been giving it over the years. Until they do proper balance and any prospect of sensible and meaningful combat is just a pipe dream sadly. It's just a pity the Devs won't work on key fundementals of design of the gameplay like this instead of the eye candy and toys, as nearly everything in the game stems from the root and that is ships, and how they function and are fitted.
Yoshi Toranaga Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:22:00 - [56] Originally by: Redundancy Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts. Why is it that everytime something is discussed constructively, DEVs glimmer by their complete abscence from the thread, making us think that you don't read or care about it. Whereas, if you insult them, they come in numbers wearing flame suits, and talk gibberish that noone cares about. If you want us to be constructive, start being it yourselves!
SamuraiJack Caldari Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:23:00 - [57] Originally by: ALPHA12125 not even a doomsdaydevice on every gate in ascn territory would have saved you. Hey its ok. Not our problem anymore. The Rest of Eve can deal with BoB. Enjoy being slaves. /me waves to DBP in his mining barge. Hows goes the trit for new titans? SJ. CLS Co-CEO and Standings Director =-
Gods Coldblood The Phoenix Rising Vigilance Infinitas	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:28:00 - [58] My only concern and this goes too the brains of CCP; If BOMBS and DOOMDAY DEVICES are to be what wins fleet warfare wether its defense or offense, WHAT is there left to do for the pvpers of eve??????? In my experince DD's have been used on any size of gang and im sure BOMBS will be too... I love good old fasionned fighting.. Now its seems illl be stupied to pvp in the future :( .. Errr have no idea what to train now errrr omg nooooo mining level 2 complete :(
Mikal Drey Purgatorial Janitors Inc.	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:30:00 - [59] hey hey I think the main problem with "tactics" in eve is the seriously borked balance or various mods and weaponry. Look at the recent "nano" flavors of the month then try to recall all the other overpowered things we have had :/ It will probably just become a new flavor and will get tuxbatted after the playerbase finds the way to grief with it and pettitions start mounting up.

Redundancy	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:33:00 - [60] Originally by: Yoshi Toranaga Why is it that everytime something is discussed constructively, DEVs glimmer by their complete abscence from the thread, making us think that you don't read or care about it. Whereas, if you insult them, they come in numbers wearing flame suits, and talk gibberish that noone cares about. If you want us to be constructive, start being it yourselves! The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. Then, of course, if you're not the guy or gal in charge of making the final decision in the matter, people can think that you're posting nonsense and not contributing anything useful back, while the internal discussion that's been started about the thread is still ongoing. Often, constructive threads are left to develop with their own ideas, which are hopefully different to what we've been considering, to provide a different point of view. Frequently we also don't have time to carry on discussions in many threads, which takes much more attention and time than checking it periodically.

Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:40:00 - [61] Edited by: Bein Glorious on 11/05/2007 12:38:55 Originally by: Redundancy The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. Then, of course, if you're not the guy or gal in charge of making the final decision in the matter, people can think that you're posting nonsense and not contributing anything useful back, while the internal discussion that's been started about the thread is still ongoing. Often, constructive threads are left to develop with their own ideas, which are hopefully different to what we've been considering, to provide a different point of view. Frequently we also don't have time to carry on discussions in many threads, which takes much more attention and time than checking it periodically. Hm, good to know. I'll keep this in mind.
Yoshi Toranaga Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:50:00 - [62] Originally by: Redundancy The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. Then, of course, if you're not the guy or gal in charge of making the final decision in the matter, people can think that you're posting nonsense and not contributing anything useful back, while the internal discussion that's been started about the thread is still ongoing. Often, constructive threads are left to develop with their own ideas, which are hopefully different to what we've been considering, to provide a different point of view. Frequently we also don't have time to carry on discussions in many threads, which takes much more attention and time than checking it periodically. Thanks. Im sure you want us to be constructive according to ideas you come up with, giving feedback as to how things should be implemented. I couldn't agree more and it's one of the things I love in this game. But what do you do when you think the DEVs are taking the wrong turn. It's hard to be constructive when you think the whole idea is gibberish. We learn about bombs from the test server, but we don't have any idea as to what the DEVs were thinking or what problem they are trying to solve. Naturally we're completely subjective thinking of how this will affect our own tactics and warfare. We have already discussed some of the problems we foresee here, so naturally when we saw bombs we might have gotten a little carried away. But back to the problem, how do we constructively tell you to abandon the idea completely without offending you :)
Gods Coldblood The Phoenix Rising Vigilance Infinitas	Posted - 2007.05.11 12:52:00 - [63] Originally by: Gods Coldblood Edited by: Gods Coldblood on 11/05/2007 12:41:10 My only concern and this goes too the brains of CCP; If BOMBS and DOOMDAY DEVICES are to be what wins fleet warfare wether its defense or offense, WHAT is there left to do for the pvpers of eve??????? In my experince DD's have been used on any size of gang and im sure BOMBS will be too... I love good old fasionned fighting.. Now its seems illl be stupied to pvp in the future :( .. " Errr I have no idea what to train now? errrr omg nooooo mining level 2 complete :( " Edit : I think CCP have a real challenge on their hands. It is not easy to think of ways to kill the blob factor without making weapons of mass destruction!!.. Other questions need to be asked for example ; 1. How can we make smaller gangs far more useful than the blob factor without inculding weapons of mass destrcution??? 2.If weapons of mass destuction are used on a smaller fleet what can the smaller fleet do to counter it??? example ... For me id like to seee a class of ship that is not skill intensive that can put up a force field around a maxium numbers of ships.. 3.Making sure new mods and weapons still complete the main objective CCP have for the Future of EVE ( Last i heard it was to make fights last longer ) ???? Just to add one last thing ... Not evryone wants to be in a capital ship!! NOt everyone wants to live in empire !! If i cant pvp within what i have said then maybe its time to move on.. Im sure im not alone in my opinions.. Please dont make me learn mining level 3
Segge Bolled	Posted - 2007.05.11 14:51:00 - [64] Originally by: Redundancy The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. Then, of course, if you're not the guy or gal in charge of making the final decision in the matter, people can think that you're posting nonsense and not contributing anything useful back, while the internal discussion that's been started about the thread is still ongoing. Often, constructive threads are left to develop with their own ideas, which are hopefully different to what we've been considering, to provide a different point of view. Frequently we also don't have time to carry on discussions in many threads, which takes much more attention and time than checking it periodically. My question is this: is the easy answer necessarily the best one to provide? I don't mean to be disrespectful, but rather what I want to ask you is that perhaps the masses should in fact develop the sense to pay an awful lot more attention to what the guy/gal with the gold bars around their post has to say about something rather than to allow the existing conjecture or misinformation to fester and proliferate? Further-more, in the event the guy/gal with the gold bars isn't the person making the final decision, can't they at least go as far as to announce instead that although they're not the person making the final decision there is in fact a decision making process under steam in the form of said internal discussion and more still, that a decision will be made and released in due time? If that is being done presently then all is well and good, but if it isn't then I find that to be a bit of a worry. I would hope that those gold bars around a post should shine like a beacon to the official truth of a conflicted matter rather than by their notable absence, become a seal or stamp of an aloof disinterest - as such an absence may otherwise be mistaken by the masses as being. If the perception of such an aloof disinterest is to prevail then surely that is nearly as destructive to future public relations as an actual aloof disinterest would have to be in actuality. I don't think you need to carry on all that great an amount of discussion, that you're reading it all is more important than that but just as importantly you really need to make it very clear that you are reading it to those who are writing it and especially to those many more who come to read it all and from it perhaps be encouraged to write a discussion of their own as a result. This probably sounds a tad cliche, but I think you will always tend to reap what you sow. On what is perhaps a more salient point to the topic of the thread, I think more information should have been released rather than the "teaser" sized source that by the lack of related information (and taking into account the effects of propagation away from a controlling source) itself causes an air of conjecture, uproar and misinformation to develop originally. As for my actual opinions raised at the start of the thread in regards to specific items of note exposed - those I'll post later when I'm more awake. I anticipate that further verbosity at this time would be perilous for me to engage in due to a significant lack of shut-eye. (Do slaver hounds also bark at 3am even if the slaves aren't stirring?)
Farrellus Cameron Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e	Posted - 2007.05.11 18:29:00 - [65] By the way, if you are unfamiliar with the sweet smell of "I told you so" check this out: http://eve-files.com/dl/104573 ----------------------------------------------------
Ticondrius Gallente	Posted - 2007.05.11 19:09:00 - [66] Originally by: Redundancy The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. Then, of course, if you're not the guy or gal in charge of making the final decision in the matter, people can think that you're posting nonsense and not contributing anything useful back, while the internal discussion that's been started about the thread is still ongoing. Often, constructive threads are left to develop with their own ideas, which are hopefully different to what we've been considering, to provide a different point of view. Frequently we also don't have time to carry on discussions in many threads, which takes much more attention and time than checking it periodically. The act of observation changes the subject being observed? You guys have gotten into too many Quantum Physics books. Just a simple post like "This topic is being considered by the Devs" or "This topic has been read by the Devs"...but without the gold bars. Maybe some new kind of forum feature to show that a topic has been devread. PLEASE. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- RABBLE! RABBLERABBLE!! MMORPG: Many Men Online Role Playing Girls
Vladimir Norkoff The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion	Posted - 2007.05.11 19:28:00 - [67] Originally by: Farrellus Cameron By the way, if you are unfamiliar with the sweet smell of "I told you so" check this out: http://eve-files.com/dl/104573 That's a bit disheartening.. 750m/s explosion velocity? 125m explosion radius? 5,000 damage?.. Guess we are going to be subjected to more Agony posts.. Great.. I wonder if it has a countdown timer, or something.. Bombs are suppossedly going to be moving slow, but I don't see a speed in that pic, only a 10sec flight time.. The range could possibly be anything from 5km (buh-bye stealth bomber) to 20km (hullo nanobomber BS of Doom!).. Also, what is that Inertia Modifier?.. Is that 1.0 or 1,000 (buh-bye nanobomber idea)??.. Will be interesting to hear more about these..
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.11 20:04:00 - [68] Bombs will stop blobs, and if you have a bunch of frigates within a closed space near your own battleships, you aren't very tactical to begin with (when you know the enemies are using bombs). As for friendlies using bombs on a battleship you're tackling, that can be avoided by some easy communication, use the bombs properly, and not when you have your own targets nearby. Bombs add tactical elements, you just have to figure out how. The straight-forward route isn't always the best idea.
S'Karra	Posted - 2007.05.11 20:07:00 - [69] While I am a little concerned about the power of these new weapons these are very early test server developments. In this form they would be unacceptable but i'm sure CCP will tweak them before release. An ideal situation would be an explosion radius and velocity similar to that of a torpedo but slightly more damage, and slower (with greater flight time to compensate). Stings the hell out of BBs and only scratches the FFs
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.11 20:09:00 - [70] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff Originally by: Farrellus Cameron By the way, if you are unfamiliar with the sweet smell of "I told you so" check this out: http://eve-files.com/dl/104573 That's a bit disheartening.. 750m/s explosion velocity? 125m explosion radius? 5,000 damage?.. Guess we are going to be subjected to more Agony posts.. Great.. I wonder if it has a countdown timer, or something.. Bombs are suppossedly going to be moving slow, but I don't see a speed in that pic, only a 10sec flight time.. The range could possibly be anything from 5km (buh-bye stealth bomber) to 20km (hullo nanobomber BS of Doom!).. Also, what is that Inertia Modifier?.. Is that 1.0 or 1,000 (buh-bye nanobomber idea)??.. Will be interesting to hear more about these.. I love it. There has to be some risk involved, so the short firing range is good. It makes huddling together a bad idea, but also adds usability... an interceptor can fly outside the blast radius quickly enough, and be lethal to the bomber (and kill it within seconds). A pack of stealth bombers can spell ruin for a blob of battleships.
Kazuo Ishiguro	Posted - 2007.05.11 20:58:00 - [71] Originally by: Vladimir Norkoff That's a bit disheartening.. 750m/s explosion velocity? 125m explosion radius? 5,000 damage?.. Guess we are going to be subjected to more Agony posts.. Great.. ... Also, what is that Inertia Modifier?.. Is that 1.0 or 1,000 (buh-bye nanobomber idea)??.. Will be interesting to hear more about these.. The inertia modifier is the the same as for most other missiles - they have no mass and this compensates for it. It governs the acceleration and turning speed of the bomb itself. There is no 'Area of Effect' attribute for these missiles, so only pilots of slow cruisers or larger ships are really going to be vulnerable. The resistance part is puzzling - if it applies to the ship that launches the bombs, it's probably to make it DD resistant. If it applies to the bombs themselves, then the 'explosive bomb' is going to be virtually invulnerable to defender missiles, which only deal explosive damage. Of course, it won't be any good against mixed DDs. ------ Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant tanking
VicturusTeSaluto	Posted - 2007.05.11 21:05:00 - [72] Edited by: VicturusTeSaluto on 11/05/2007 21:03:12 0.0 is broken and alliance warfare is one of the worst parts of the game. I don't mind if they play around with it.
Kazender Caldari My Little Pony VS Predator	Posted - 2007.05.11 21:07:00 - [73] Originally by: CCP Oveur Originally by: Tsanse Kinske Originally by: Zell Shadowcast hey wow lets wildly speculate about things only in the very early stages of development and make dumb judgements before we actually know any real information! This man speaks wisdom. BOMBS, TECH 3, FACTIONAL WARFARE, AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WALLET ARE GOING TO KILL EVE DEAD DEAD DEAD!!! As you can see, my young apprentice, your friends have failed. Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational wallet! Oveur wins for using a modified star wars quote! ------------------------------------------------ The purpose of life: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, hear the lamentation of their women.
HairyGary	Posted - 2007.05.11 21:33:00 - [74] I don't think another option could "destroy tactical warfare". If anything, I'd expect it make a lot of new tactics available. Of course, it might make some of the old tactics obsolete, but having to adapt to a new set of rules hardly constitutes "destroying" tactical warfare.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.11 23:27:00 - [75] Edited by: Rells on 11/05/2007 23:31:50 Originally by: Redundancy Seriously, if you post stuff whining about everything because you take the position that the developers are idiots and it's going to be broken anyway, they're going to start ignoring you. Tone it down, take out the insults and discuss the possible problems with changes constructively, or nobody in the office is going to read your posts. To put it bluntly, the CCP developers have made a number of spectacular catastrophic mistakes in the recent past. They created 11km/s superweapons when the setups were reported on the test server long before they made it to market. They created an un-warp-scrambleable superweapon and advocated that the way to kill it was to "bump it with a bunch of nano dreads". Furthermore, a number of SERIOUSLY BAD things are broken in the game such as the corp interface -- whenever I click on my sanctionable actions tab it locks my client for 10 minutes. These things don't get fixed and the changes to the corp interface that have been announced are a weak attempt to try to flog off that you are doing something about it when you aren't. I dont care how many fools flame me on this thread, the record of late has been less than impressive. Now I wouldn't come to this cesspool of a forum if I wasn't willing to brave the extremely NASTY uncontrolled people here. I come here and put up with this garbage because I care about the game and its direction. I have played for 4 years and my organization in this game has shown that tactics are able to be done in this game if you choose to. However, at every turn CCP is putting in something half done that is eroding tactics miserably in the name of ... well I'm not entirely sure why these changes are going in. Possibly it is to give the big alliances more toys and freeze out everyone with less than 500 billion isk and absolutely no creativity on how to fight another way? I have tried to be constructive many times and it gets ignored. There is a 7 page thread in here that is constructive and it was flat out ignored and had a considerable amount of dishwater thrown over it with these announcements. I would like to have the MAJOR issues in the game repaired, not more toys for the super rich or more attempts at futilely fighting blob mentality or more ways to make the game conducive to the stupid. The game doesn't need to be dumbed down but it does need to be fixed. I cant think of anything associated with eve that is worse than these forums. They make me ill. I HATE posting here so when I do, there is a reason for it. Id love to see CCP turn it around when it comes to features but all I see is a bunch of the devs saying "why don't we do X" and no one on your team saying "woah, wait a minute, X could be used like Y and we don't want that!" Perhaps its the culture in the office, I don't know. Im a professional programmer myself and I have seen that happen to organizations. However, if CCP doesn't start doing it, there will be more Nanophoons and Doomsday device debacles while the core things that need fixing are ignored. Isnt it time you learned how to fight back?
Teebee	Posted - 2007.05.12 00:00:00 - [76] I Would be realy nice if the DEVS made it impossible for 1 alliance to rule the entire 0.0 .
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.05.12 00:27:00 - [77] Edited by: Tobias Sjodin on 12/05/2007 00:25:01 Originally by: Rells I dont care how many fools flame me on this thread Perhaps more people would be open to discussion if it weren't for this "my way is the only right way, everyone who disagrees with me is a fool"-attitude of yours.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.12 01:57:00 - [78] OK, I'm going to try to respond to lots of things in one post, rather than spamming the thread as massively as I've done in the past: 1) Are the devs stupid? I don't think so. I do think they make mistakes. And I think they screw up at times - indestructible supercapitals are bad for the game, warnings about nano-battleships were ignored, the BPO lottery has been profoundly problematic from the beginning to the end, and the proposals regarding bombs are considered by many Agony officers to be profoundly misguided. But let's take a moment and review some good things that the devs have done - salvaging and rigs are good for the game. Exploration is good. The plan to eliminate fixed belts and complexes is good. Wallet upgrades are good. The word is that 'ship type' is a column in the overview on the test server, that's good. Factional warfare is a great idea, and hopefully it will be well-implemented. Invention is good. The devs are not stupid. But they are (seemingly) in the process of making a serious mistake, and we're doing what we can to stop that mistake. 2) Can AoE weapons reduce the blob problem? Not in the slightest. The 'blob problem' is 'lag' by another name - it's the lag that you get when large numbers of ships are on the same grid at the same time. Moving those ships apart by a margin of 'bomb radius + safety margin' won't get them off the grid, and it won't get them into a different system. There is absolutely no reduction in the true 'blob problem' that can be attributed to AoE weapons. 3) Agony is just whining because they're losing their advantage, right? Agony's advantage is our ability to mobilize significant numbers of ships and have them work as a team. Bombs do significantly change the balance - they advantage 'weight of metal' over 'weight of numbers'. So bombs do present an immediate increase in difficulty for Agony. However, we are currently developing strategies that will involve dispersed formations and overwhelming numbers of bomb-throwers. Hopefully, we'll never use them. But this might be exactly the change that sees our BASIC classes destroying formations of battleships, instead of only those battleships that are foolish enough to travel without a proper escort. What it does mean is that any corp that wants to follow Agony's example will experience much greater difficulties. Right now, a gang of 5 frigates can do a surprisingly large amount of damage. But all it would take is a couple of bomb hits to wipe them all out. Making it difficult to target the frigates is no solution - with most engagements, there'll be an easy target that's close to the frigates. (Unless the bomb's area of effect is so small as to make the weapon useless, but we don't think that error is particularly likely.) Agony can mobilize gangs of 30 or more ships - the vast majority of corps in this game can't do that. 4) Isn't your communication style counter-productive? Rells has a rather forceful and passionate way of expressing himself. It's that forceful and passionate nature that makes him an inspirational leader. There are plenty of people who are offended by forceful and passionate expressions, but the unfortunate reality is that quiet reasonableness has a tendency to be ignored. If the devs wanted to encourage people to speak quietly and respectfully in the game development forum, they should have responded quicker on the nanophoon. Lastly, I'd like to acknowledge the intelligent argument by the guy from Triumvirate who pointed out some interesting tactical and strategic possibilities regarding jump gates, points that I hadn't considered. It's a shame that his quiet and intelligent post appears to have gone largely unnoticed. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Gilbert Drillerson DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.05.12 02:18:00 - [79] Jump gates on POS's are long overdue. People seem to think it benefits the big alliances when in fact its the the other way. Major alliances has: * titans (with jump gates that can move freighters) * large carrier fleets that can do logistics * Defensive capabilities to protect logistics operations Minor alliances dont have any of this, so if the requirements for jump gates in terms of sov are reasonable, it will mean a more level playing field for the small/new alliances. Just my 2 cents on that. Dont get mad - Get even
Sh'irna	Posted - 2007.05.12 04:19:00 - [80] Gilbert: If previous posters are correct and you need Soverignty 4 then this is another toy for the super alliances, not the smaller groups. BoD for the win?
Gabriel Karade Celtic Anarchy Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.05.12 07:21:00 - [81] Perhaps a naive question, but have you guys (CCP) looked into the mechanics of a large gang warping onto the grid? What I mean is, currently everything bunches up into a tightly packed sphere but what if, with an increasing gang size, there was an increasing 'error' on the warp-in position for the ships in that gang? (Depending on the numbers this may be tens or even up to hundreds of kmÆs) It may then make it more desirable to warp in small detachments rather than one huge gang û resulting in small clusters of ships spread of the grid duking it out (with fast interceptors and the like moving between the individual fights) rather than two huge æpowerballsÆ. ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Reithan Caldari Zero Team	Posted - 2007.05.12 08:57:00 - [82] I think that the best way to do this would be, instead of finding ways to hurt large groups and make them 'weaker' - find ways to BOOST small groups and make them more tactically advantageous. Find things that small groups would excell at and larger groups would either be unable or inefficient at doing. Maybe even make bonuses for travelling in small groups - possibly through use of leadership skills? Maybe seriously boost leadership skills - but then give them seriously diminishing returns in larger groups? Or find ways to BREAK big groups into smaller groups? Maybe once a certain grid has X number of ships in it, warping to that grid starts getting scattered due to interference? Making people land 100's or 1000's of kms away from their intended point (randomly of course), or even shunt them completely to other nearby grids? This all, of course being on random chance - so you can TRY to bring in a blob - but more likely than not, it'll just end up spread all over the system and end up being used as re-inforcements, not a massive blob. Maybe even make it so when the other side's blob starts coming in, it's random deviations have a high chance of landing on the side's deviations? Then you get fighting in small packs, which is the intended goal! Don't nerf blobs. Boost small gangs. DOWN WITH THE TECH2 LOTTERY!!!
Chewan Mesa coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.12 11:25:00 - [83] The way I see it, after checking the stats on SiSi... -> All those Mods, Jump Bridges, Cyno Jammers, static Cyno Gens etc will be outside the shields. This adds objectives for smaller gangs to go roaming and disable these. Its what everyone asked for, more stuff to do if you dont have a 500man blob. Imagine disabling an alliances jump-bridge chain with a few small gangs. Cyno jammers also mean youll need to disable those before you can bring your caps in to siege a system, they are system wide according to their descr. -> Jump bridges require the jumping ships to have Stront as fuel loaded as I got it, so you wont see small gangs using this thing 23/7, its just too much work. It also reqs an activation fuel like Cynos, which is liquid Ozone. Sov lvl 3 btw, so you wont run from first 0.0 close to emp up into your home sys easily. -> New Neuts for POSs seem to be a slight nerf against cap-ships sieging as well... I wouldnt say this all is a nerf for tactical warfare tbh, but we'll have to see how it actually is implemented. Also, whats this added mothership and carrier bonus for a new mod, different bonus on the 2 classes?
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.12 15:45:00 - [84] @Reithan The problem then is that you will have half a dozen groups of 10 warp in at the same time and to the same point and the net effect is the same. In fact, if you boost small gangs you just made the blob more powerful. Blobs can not be fought except by CCP introducing more tactics and ideas that CAN be used to attack them. Note the use of the word "CAN' because many people will still whine that they cant be fought, choosing not to employ tactics. Ironically the ECM nerfs that happened recently was perhaps the biggest boost to the blob that ever happened. Attacking a blob with ECM jamming takes training, coordination and skill. The nerfing it to near uselessness has made blobs be even more tank and gang. CCP should start writing in code and thinking about the features in the galactic context before putting things on TQ. @Chewan Mesa 1) The jump portals do not put out possibilities for small gangs. Lets not forget you have to tank the large POS while trying to shoot at them. You will need serious hardware for that. With a cyno jammer in effect, you will need a LOT of BS to blow up all 30 of those that alliances can deploy in their system. A LOT of tanks and gank BS is a blob. So, if anything the changes ENCOURAGE blobs. 2) Jump bridges are out of the reach of the small organization because of the soverignty needs. Furhtermore, the fuel cost for jumping wouldn't even register on the wallets of the corps that can deploy these in the first place. These alliances have squads of carebear iceminers cutting ice for them 7 days a week. So in summary, they have nerfed tactical warfare and ENCOURAGED blobing. If someone at CCP would have the courage and speak up to the great and mighty Tuxford and Oveur instead of just being yes-men then a lot of this would have been brought to the table before the feature ever made it near public. I have seen organizations where the developers are encouraged to shut up and never contradict the leads, perhaps CCP is one of them because their track record for avoiding EXTREMELY BAD and predictable side effects is very dismal. Isnt it time you learned how to fight back?
Chewan Mesa coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.05.12 16:54:00 - [85] Afaik you can only deploy 2 Cyno jammers per system...or I'm confusing that. You do have a point though on small gangs not being able to tank a POS long enough to take out the modules. However I cant believe CCP havent thought about these issues when designing the mods...
Saori Rei Gallente Arcana Imperii Ltd. The Cartel.	Posted - 2007.05.12 17:34:00 - [86] I can't help but think that these bombs are going to really screw Gallente over. Think about all these drones popping...
Vladimir Norkoff The Black Rabbits Fatal Persuasion	Posted - 2007.05.12 18:07:00 - [87] Edited by: Vladimir Norkoff on 12/05/2007 18:06:34 Originally by: BluOrange Agony's advantage is our ability to mobilize significant numbers of ships and have them work as a team. Bombs do significantly change the balance - they advantage 'weight of metal' over 'weight of numbers'. So bombs do present an immediate increase in difficulty for Agony. Err... Correct me if I'm wrong, but no information seems to have been released for AoE bombs yet.. The bomb info that has been released appears to be single target weapons.. Weapons that can apparently be fitted onto a frig and seem to be absolutley perfect for BS destruction.. If anything, I would have thought Agony would be messing their pants in excitment over the bombs.. If they are released with their current stats, any BS without an interceptor escort is pretty much deadmeat.. Even with an escort, you'd lose a few BSs to a decent bomber squad.. These things will make balanced squads almost mandatory, no more mass BS gankfests.. I'd go so far as to say that the day of the Battleship is passing, and that small and fast is where it's at.. Then again, I could be wrong..
Reithan Caldari Zero Team	Posted - 2007.05.12 21:34:00 - [88] Originally by: Saori Rei I can't help but think that these bombs are going to really screw Gallente over. Think about all these drones popping... Seen the explo velocity or radius on those bombs? I don't know for sure, as I haven't run the math, but I'm pretty sure they'll do slim to nothing to most drones. But yeah, if you get like 3-4 bombs dropped on you, your drones will pop - if they're right next to you and NOT attacking something else...and you'll be dead, too, anyway... ...so why do you care about the drones again?? Think about it, the bombs won't be going off right next to the thing your drones are attacking - they'll be going off right next to YOU. And you're a lot more susceptible to them than your drones are. DOWN WITH THE TECH2 LOTTERY!!!
Reithan Caldari Zero Team	Posted - 2007.05.12 21:51:00 - [89] Originally by: Rells @Reithan The problem then is that you will have half a dozen groups of 10 warp in at the same time and to the same point and the net effect is the same. In fact, if you boost small gangs you just made the blob more powerful. Blobs can not be fought except by CCP introducing more tactics and ideas that CAN be used to attack them. Note the use of the word "CAN' because many people will still whine that they cant be fought, choosing not to employ tactics. Ironically the ECM nerfs that happened recently was perhaps the biggest boost to the blob that ever happened. Attacking a blob with ECM jamming takes training, coordination and skill. The nerfing it to near uselessness has made blobs be even more tank and gang. CCP should start writing in code and thinking about the features in the galactic context before putting things on TQ. Well, that was only one suggestion. I still think that it'd be a better idea that just, once a certain grid gets too many ships in it, you start getting a % chance to "miss" your warp due to interference - thus forcefully making big blobs get spread out. Though, even the small objectives they're adding don't make it BETTER to bring a small group - they just make it POSSIBLE to succeed with a small group - provided the opposition doesn't already have a larger group in place. Yeah, a small group of frigs could pop something outside the POS's defenses...until the POS's owners put a blob there - now you have to bring a blob, too...and now we're back where we started. To make people stop blobbing one of 3 things needs to happen: 1. Make it BAD to blob (AoE weapons, etc - though teh AoE weapons may or may not accomplish this, really...) 2. Make it GOOD to use smaller groups and not blob. (Possible bonii for small groups, smaller objectives to go to...more tactical combat, etc) 3. Make it NOT POSSIBLE to blob. (I.E: scatter on warp in, or somesuch) A combination of 1 or more of these is the only way to do it. So far, it seems like they're going ALL-OUT to option 1, with a few tweaks in the way of option 2. Though, the way they're doing it doesn't really seem to accomplish option 1 - it just means blobs will change - not go away. Their tweaks in the way of option 2 seem a little weak at best. They've not done anything in the way of 3 so far that I've seen. Other things that could be done: The more ships in an area the slower cap/shields/etc recharge due to heavy EMF interference. The more ships in an area means slower targeting due to sensor overload. Too many ships create leadership-based penalties. Fewer ships = leadership bonii, etc *Scatter on warp in if grid's over-filled (Though you should get a warning on initiating warp - in case the grid's just full of enemies...) There's lot of ways to do this - though I'm still skeptical about CCP's choices in the matter. With the current changes I just see well-organized blobs getting MORE powerful, not less.
Kazuki Fuse Nubs. D-L	Posted - 2007.05.13 00:17:00 - [90] Wow, let me just add this to the list of reasons why I didn't join AU long ago.. Insulting people just makes everyone not want to listen to any valid point in your post Rells- when are you going to realize that? Classic....
Caius Sivaris Minmatar Dark Nexxus Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2007.05.14 13:49:00 - [91] Originally by: Redundancy The easy answer is that we read constructive posts and think about them, but that posting in a good thread can be disruptive because most people start focusing on the minutae of what the guy or gal with gold bars has said, and not the ongoing discussion. A "Keep going guys we are all ears" would go a long way toward avoiding the "OMG this thread is 7 page long and still no dev answer".
Rabbitual Ferrier	Posted - 2007.05.14 16:10:00 - [92] You know reading the dev blogs might help somewhat. Also to be fair CCP have done a pretty good job so far of not killing eve with expansions and additions, and the Nerfs. Bombs are indeed stealth bomber only, and they are vulnerable to attack prior to their detonation (and vary in type from ECM/Neutraliser to Damage type - and Probably by size. Think of it like submarine warfare. Rather than pack out an area you need to spread out over the sector and try to locate the target whilst presenting minimal targets of oppertuntity. Of course CCP should also introduce a Stealth Hunter class of ship - that specifically can reveal cloaked ships (possibly a tech 2 Frigate type - ie something that would also need to be protected against covert ops ships and stealth bombers). The idea is to make stealth bombers useful and secondly to encourage fleets to be used tactically, rather than blobtactically (ie like a fleet rather than a mob). Of course what would be very tasty would be collatoral targets (ie War targets expanded to allow you to hit fleet hangers, docked ships, offices, research posts, manufacturing - which would expand to allow guerilla actions) - Regardless of location (with destroying all Corp Facilities counting as a victory). Maybe with an option for players to decommission ships in personal hangers for the duration of the war dec (ie ships in dock can be hit unless decomissioned under the Yelti Conventions). That certainly would encourge the idea of protecting assets with a fleet rather than blobing.
BluOrange Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.05.15 07:42:00 - [93] Originally by: Rabbitual Ferrier You know reading the dev blogs might help somewhat. Check the date of Rells's post. Check the date of the dev blog where they told us what was going on. Check the thread for comments on the blog for comments by Agony pilots. Is it a coincidence that the dev blog came out shortly after Rells's post? Given the comments in the blog about speculation, I suspect not. ------ Agony Unleashed is recruiting.
Rabbitual Ferrier	Posted - 2007.05.15 17:37:00 - [94] Originally by: BluOrange Originally by: Rabbitual Ferrier You know reading the dev blogs might help somewhat. Check the date of Rells's post. Check the date of the dev blog where they told us what was going on. Check the thread for comments on the blog for comments by Agony pilots. Is it a coincidence that the dev blog came out shortly after Rells's post? Given the comments in the blog about speculation, I suspect not. applies egg to face. Sorry
Saltire System-Lords E N I G M A	Posted - 2007.05.15 18:21:00 - [95] hahaha, please put this module in so we can get rid of crappy t1 frig/desy fleets like these agony nubs. SALTIRE : the most loved, feared and respected pvper and pirate in eve history.
Steppa Gallente Incognito Inc	Posted - 2007.05.15 18:28:00 - [96] Originally by: Xeliya From my understanding the Jump Portals require lv4 sov which is 3 outposts in one constellation under your control for 2 months. (1 month after you get sov 3). IMO I think that is a damn fair trade off, you have over 90b invested in 5-10 systems you deserve to have a jump portal between systems there. Next is this is on the test server, there has been a lot of items put onto that server and never made it on to Tranquillity. So just because it is there does not mean it is an actual planned change. One of the best ways to improve a product is it to try out new stuff and see what the feedback is. Also posting in a constrictive feedback type of way in the development forum would get you a lot further. POS maintainence is one of the most dull, hassle-filled, problematic dynamics in the game. Jump portals for that level of sovereignty make sense, for one, eleviate sheer boredom for two, and give us a sense of technological progression. Just imagine...you'll be able to say to a brand-new player (affect an ol' timer's voice), "yeah, sonny, I 'member the day we was forced to little indie haulers to get our ice out to the stations. Now you kids is jumpin' here and there like rabbits." 5 light-year distance isn't that much to get all worked up about anyway...unless its for use within a constellation. In that case, it makes constellation defense very effective.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [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.