EVE Search - What feature would you want to see in Eve 2?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

What feature would you want to see in Eve 2?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:47:00 - [1] I know that there will probably never be an Eve-Online 2, but everyone, at one point or another, has tought things among those line: "Eve would be so much better if...", while knowning that it would be far to big a change for it to be patched into Eve. This thread is to recap some of them. Who know? It might give some ideas for CCP. Here's mine, and I'll begin with an observation: Do the Revelations II trailer, with gigantic fleets slowly advancing toward each other, give you shivers of excitation? Previous trailers with their squadrons keeping formation? It does for me, and it's a shame that in-game groups of ships move like a mob rathen than a real fleet. At the same time, Eve isn't realist. I don't speak about the collision mechanics (or lack thereoff), or the maximal speed in space, but rather on the ships themselves. Who ever heard of a battleship or dreadnought without lots of point defense guns? In Eve, that's necessary to keep small ships usefull, but that lead to a relative immunity between ship classes: A Dread won't be able to do much to an HAS, and that HAS won't even begin to dent the dread's armor, either. So, here's what I'd like to find, if there ever was an Eve 2: - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. There would of course be external views, but more for admiring yout ship than anything else. Your ship wouldn't be a point in space, like it is right now, but have a real volume, and, with it, real fitting choices to do: put all your weapons on your front, and you get screwed if someone gets in your rear. Have your weapons cover ever directions, and you can't concentrate your fire anywhere. And then, turreted guns for maximal coverage, or spinal weapons for manual aiming, but with more power or range? The possibilities and choices to make are endless. Homeworld 2 players who used to avoid the Vaygr's battlecruiser main weapon by staying on it's flanks, and detroying it's engines to prevent it from turning around, will know just how much it can enhance tactics. - Second, About the balance between ships of different classes: don't try to keep each powerfull with artificial unrealist limits like locking time. A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. It's a frigging battleship ! litterally bristling with guns! Bug the key word here being "lone": If the player with the big ship is individually much stronger, the player with the small ship need numbers to compensate, that's not rocket science. So, instead of a paper-scissor type of game (like weapon sizes in Eve), let's give the players whole squadrons of small ships. They'd basically act like drones, keeping formation, firing on what the player is firing, and basically adding firepower and HP to make it a viable choice, without turning a single small ship into ridiculous overpoweredness... Exemple: One player with an interceptor squadron (14 fighters) attack a player with a cruiser squadron (2 cruisers). The cruiser anti-ship weapons miss the fighters, but their numerous point defense guns hit them. As cruisers take damage, they lose weapons, shield, engines... As the fighters take damage, some of them dies. If the fighter controled by the player get downed, he gets control of the next one... The issue of the fight would depend both on the skill points and fitting, and piloting skills of each player. After the fight, the reduced fighter squadron would need to get new fighters with the help of a carrier, or a planetary base, or whatever, and the cruisers would need to find a shipyard (mobile or naval base, doesn't matter) to rearm, or with a limited self-repair capability. In short, fleets that really look like fleets, with capital ships escorted by scores of small ships in formations, like it should be, increased importance of mobility and fittings, first-person piloting, and battles that look and feel like those you see in movies. What's not to like in that? ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Nigbale Amare Amarr	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:54:00 - [2] I'd just want to say two things : Joystick maneuvring and aiming at 400 ms lag. 10v10 each with his own inty squadron.
Jim McGregor	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:55:00 - [3] I would like dynamic load balancing that really works, allowing for large fleet battles with no noticeable lag at all (except perhaps client lag). But I dont know if its possible to do that, even if they rewrite the entire game from scratch. --- Originally by: CCP Wrangler You're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, thats what hello kitty online is for.
Iyanah Minmatar Mining Munitions and Mayhem R i s e	Posted - 2007.08.03 13:59:00 - [4] Originally by: Jim McGregor I would like dynamic load balancing that really works, allowing for large fleet battles with no noticeable lag at all (except perhaps client lag). But I dont know if its possible to do that, even if they rewrite the entire game from scratch. i'd like that in eve as it is now. what would i want in eve 2? nothing. the beauty of this game is that they don't need to release a sequel, they can just upgrade the current game. ========================================== Iy please remember: I AM a sarcastic ******* and nothing i say has ever represented the thoughts or feelings of my corp, alliance, or anyone really. read
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:04:00 - [5] Originally by: Shadowsword - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. There would of course be external views, but more for admiring yout ship than anything else. Your ship wouldn't be a point in space, like it is right now, but have a real volume, and, with it, real fitting choices to do: put all your weapons on your front, and you get screwed if someone gets in your rear. Have your weapons cover ever directions, and you can't concentrate your fire anywhere. And then, turreted guns for maximal coverage, or spinal weapons for manual aiming, but with more power or range? The possibilities and choices to make are endless. Homeworld 2 players who used to avoid the Vaygr's battlecruiser main weapon by staying on it's flanks, and detroying it's engines to prevent it from turning around, will know just how much it can enhance tactics. I very much like this idea! Maybe not something quite as complicated, but definitely different turret hardpoints on the front, back, side, top, and bottom of ships. I also like the idea of subsystem targetting, i.e. smaller ships could be better than larger ships at attacking individual areas of a ship like sensors, engines, weapons, etcetera. Quote: A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. It's a frigging battleship ! litterally bristling with guns! Bug the key word here being "lone": If the player with the big ship is individually much stronger, the player with the small ship need numbers to compensate, that's not rocket science. So, instead of a paper-scissor type of game (like weapon sizes in Eve), let's give the players whole squadrons of small ships. Meh...one of the things that I love about EVE is that trustworthy pilots are ten times as valuable as faction gear, I don't want that to change. Originally by: Jim McGregor I would like dynamic load balancing that really works, allowing for large fleet battles with no noticeable lag at all (except perhaps client lag). Dynamic load balancing might work, but I doubt we'll be seeing lag free battles anytime soon. ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION \| Forum Whiners - Unite!
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:13:00 - [6] EVE2? I'd like stacking free modules and I dont want 'fights to last longer' Caldari and proud
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:20:00 - [7] Originally by: Tarminic Quote: A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. It's a frigging battleship ! litterally bristling with guns! Bug the key word here being "lone": If the player with the big ship is individually much stronger, the player with the small ship need numbers to compensate, that's not rocket science. So, instead of a paper-scissor type of game (like weapon sizes in Eve), let's give the players whole squadrons of small ships. Meh...one of the things that I love about EVE is that trustworthy pilots are ten times as valuable as faction gear, I don't want that to change. That wouldn't change at all. Your friends would have other squadrons, or single capital ships, but you'd still be able to fly with them. ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Sazkyen	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:41:00 - [8] Consensual PvP
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:48:00 - [9] Originally by: Sazkyen Consensual PvP never go back to WoW. And I have one problem your idea op. have you ever played a RTS before? have you SEEN mammy in C&C try to kill a lone rocket unit? it can't kill the small unit becuase it is a big tank fitted to deal with other tanks. That said I'd like to see battleships getting bonus to all size weapons so you can take out a frig killer with 8 small guns. Speaking of which this high slot stuff, I don't like it. I understand the idea but, it seems limiting. the guns on a batleship aren't that much bigger than medium guns. so why does a battleship exist? I'd like to see battleship sized (rl) gunes fitted on battleships. as you know these ships are much bigger than our normal battleships, then why does it have such an akwark gun on it? I don't know if you can understand what I'm say but basically... If a battleship gun in our world is lets say 20 feet tall, and is shaped in that awesome way you see on battleships, why then are the guns in eve on battleships, which are about 60 feet tall, shaped like a hand gun... doesn't seem to add up. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 14:52:00 - [10] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Sazkyen Consensual PvP never go back to WoW. And I have one problem your idea op. have you ever played a RTS before? have you SEEN mammy in C&C try to kill a lone rocket unit? it can't kill the small unit becuase it is a big tank fitted to deal with other tanks. C&C is ultra-mega-giga rubbish when it comes to that type of thing. YOu should play Blitzkreig II instead. It **es on all other RTS's. Caldari and proud**
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:11:00 - [11] Originally by: Death Kill Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Sazkyen Consensual PvP never go back to WoW. And I have one problem your idea op. have you ever played a RTS before? have you SEEN mammy in C&C try to kill a lone rocket unit? it can't kill the small unit becuase it is a big tank fitted to deal with other tanks. C&C is ultra-mega-giga rubbish when it comes to that type of thing. YOu should play Blitzkreig II instead. It **es on all other RTS's. sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote:** CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:16:00 - [12] Edited by: Shadowsword on 03/08/2007 15:17:15 Originally by: MotherMoon [sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? Pretty much, their missile salvoes kill air and infantry really fast, on top of being effective anti-armor weapons, and the main guns are even more anti-armor, and fairly decent anti-infantry... Make a group of 10 of them, and you're nearly unstoppable. ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:18:00 - [13] Edited by: MotherMoon on 03/08/2007 15:19:49 Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: MotherMoon [sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? Pretty much, their missile salvoes kill air and infantry really fast, on to pof being effective anti-armor weapons, and the main guns are even more anti-armor, and fairly decent anti-infantry... do the tanks have tracking speed then? can small units run around it? tanks turrets move really slow in real life and hit things up close.. at all. they can't aim down to hit anything that's within 20 feet and shorter than the tank. I'll stick with starcraft for my RTS gaming then. I don't liek games where ten of unit makes you unstopable. I liek starcraft, where you make 20 of a unit to get them owned by 4 of nother unit. maybe eve could do a system like this instead. kinda like how a battkeship sucks when trying to hit a bomber but the bombers missile ***the battleships face. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote:** CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
RaTTuS BIG	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:35:00 - [14] Aren't we on Eve 3 or 4 now anyway ... Eve 2 was RmR. -- BIG Lottery, BIG Deal, InEve & RaTTuS Home
Roast Bifcurtains	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:37:00 - [15] I would like it not to crash all the time kthnxbye. Server is DOOOOWN!!! ================================================ Endless Love
Hawk Bavil Tides of Silence Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:40:00 - [16] Yep a server that dosnt crash would be nice.
Fanjita	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:42:00 - [17] The ability to play online
Weyoun 1 Gallente Soviet Star Federation Celestial Frontier	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:43:00 - [18] Wake up man! Hello? Good morning, we are already in EVE 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gusy	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:43:00 - [19] Wizardy hats
Dreeper	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:46:00 - [20] lol @joystick control with 200 ppl involved.... ever tried playing quake with a 500 ping? I d be happy if we had a 1st person just to feel involved, for the immersion.... and most important: community addon support, so the community can do their OWN grafx for ship interior and CPP can then adopt it and use it ingame cause there are so many grafx guys and coders etc playing eve... who would be willing to use their free time on their hobby.... 2nd life prooves that it works.... cpp needs to offer systems where the community can mod the game client and if things are shiny and pass cpps quality they might even consider adding client-mods (pure visuals) to the standard game client.. oh, and physics... yeah.... I wanna fly like im in space, not like im in air or water cheers ____________________ Dont feed the trolls
area51 Gallente Pilipino Corp Ekliptika	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:48:00 - [21] less server outages.
Jack Target Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:55:00 - [22] I like the way Eve Online is evolving as it is. I've also invested time and effort into my character, Jack Target, and I don't want to say goodbye to him!
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 15:59:00 - [23] Originally by: MotherMoon [ sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? No, not really. but its very complex. Light tanks cant kill a heavy tank because they simply dont have enough firepower, while a heavy tank pwns light and medium ones. Infantry are deadmeat when faced with a tank as tanks have both machine guns and a gun turret. Theres no logic behind a tank not being able to kill infantry. Caldari and proud
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:02:00 - [24] Originally by: MotherMoon do the tanks have tracking speed then? can small units run around it? tanks turrets move really slow in real life and hit things up close.. at all. they can't aim down to hit anything that's within 20 feet and shorter than the tank. I'll stick with starcraft for my RTS gaming then. I don't liek games where ten of unit makes you unstopable. I liek starcraft, where you make 20 of a unit to get them owned by 4 of nother unit. maybe eve could do a system like this instead. kinda like how a battkeship sucks when trying to hit a bomber but the bombers missile ***the battleships face. Tanks are super slow, so the lighters a unit is the more it can mmanouver. If infantry gets to close the tank just use its machine guns. Artiallry has never been so fun and so intimidating as in this game. you send out scouts, and if you find enemy grid locations you can bombard them from the other side of the (large) map. Ofcorse artillary is sitting ducks for anything with a pointy stick or better. Then theres bomber planes and fighter planes, aa guns etc etc. Its a very realistic RTS, and you dont build a base and produce stuff instead you rely on reinforcements...and you can chose what type you want...tanks, infantry, artillary, planes etc. Caldari and proud**
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:02:00 - [25] Originally by: Death Kill Originally by: MotherMoon sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? No, not really. but its very complex. Light tanks cant kill a heavy tank because they simply dont have enough firepower, while a heavy tank pwns light and medium ones. Infantry are deadmeat when faced with a tank as tanks have both machine guns and a gun turret. Theres no logic behind a tank not being able to kill infantry. Yes there is - a tank can't hit infantry with it's primary weapon because it's designed for firing at vehicles from long range, and it's visibility in close quarters is very poor. The only way that gun is effective is if there's someone on top of the tank manning it, which is about the same as having infantry anyway. Infantry may be dead mean if they're running across a football field toward a tank without any cover, but that's beside the point. ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION \| Forum Whiners - Unite!
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:05:00 - [26] Edited by: Death Kill on 03/08/2007 16:05:29 Originally by: Tarminic Yes there is - a tank can't hit infantry with it's primary weapon because it's designed for firing at vehicles from long range, and it's visibility in close quarters is very poor. The only way that gun is effective is if there's someone on top of the tank manning it, which is about the same as having infantry anyway. Infantry may be dead mean if they're running across a football field toward a tank without any cover, but that's beside the point. Nonsense. Ever heard about high explosive shells? And the machine gun is located inside the tank, with a crewman operating it. Heres my favorite tank in the game. slow as hell but good range and firepower. Linkage Caldari and proud
Pan Crastus	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:10:00 - [27] How about stuff we would NOT like to see: - daily downtimes (regular or not) - lag - US$ => GTC => ISK (a.k.a. RMT) - gameplay that stresses your patience (POS sitting, POS shooting) - spineless metagaming fools (ts spies, alt creation/deletion to circumvent security status...) - stealth nerfs / fixes - forum whines this is a free post provided to you by a member of the EVE community.
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:11:00 - [28] Originally by: Death Kill Edited by: Death Kill on 03/08/2007 16:05:29 Originally by: Tarminic Yes there is - a tank can't hit infantry with it's primary weapon because it's designed for firing at vehicles from long range, and it's visibility in close quarters is very poor. The only way that gun is effective is if there's someone on top of the tank manning it, which is about the same as having infantry anyway. Infantry may be dead mean if they're running across a football field toward a tank without any cover, but that's beside the point. Nonsense. Ever heard about high explosive shells? And the machine gun is located inside the tank, with a crewman operating it. Heres my favorite tank in the game. slow as hell but good range and firepower. Linkage Hrm, got me there. ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION \| Forum Whiners - Unite!
Zeknichov Amarr Life. Universe. Everything. Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:14:00 - [29] Originally by: Sazkyen Consensual PvP OH NO YOU DIDN'T! EVE2? Colonization of planets, where the elements from planets are different then that found in space and are required for T5 module production. Rather then wars being fought solely from space there would also be ground wars fought with FPS style combat. Space ships couldn't partake in ground wars but they could be used to cut off supplies to the planet. Improving all ships scanners to that where probes are used mainly for finding hidden systems/belts and not for finding ships. Allowing ships to track other ships warp direction. The ability catch up to ships in warp and target/attack them while they are in warp, meaning the ability for your ship to adjust its warp speed while in warp. The ability to target specific systems on a spaceship, such as its warp drive, weapons system, normal propulsion, targeting and the like, while at the same time removing all EW, including warp disruptors and webs. Rebalancing speed vs turrets tracking and missiles damage. As it stands speed negates far too much damage. Low signature radius and high speed shouldn't mean total protection but high damage reduction.
Tanis Kvanz	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:15:00 - [30] Couple new races to chose from: Jove and BoB
Tanis Kvanz	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:16:00 - [31] Edited by: Tanis Kvanz on 03/08/2007 16:21:43 Couple new races to choose from: Jove and BoB
Maxpie Cross Roads	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:26:00 - [32] No alts. 1 character per account. He put... creatures... in our bodies... to control our minds. He made us... say lies... do things.
Fuglife Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:34:00 - [33] Nightelf's
Ishmael Hansen No Quarter. Vae Victis.	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:38:00 - [34] Exotic Dancers tech 2
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:43:00 - [35] Originally by: Tarminic Originally by: Death Kill Originally by: MotherMoon sure, but one question, in that game do tanks pawn all units? No, not really. but its very complex. Light tanks cant kill a heavy tank because they simply dont have enough firepower, while a heavy tank pwns light and medium ones. Infantry are deadmeat when faced with a tank as tanks have both machine guns and a gun turret. Theres no logic behind a tank not being able to kill infantry. Yes there is - a tank can't hit infantry with it's primary weapon because it's designed for firing at vehicles from long range, and it's visibility in close quarters is very poor. The only way that gun is effective is if there's someone on top of the tank manning it, which is about the same as having infantry anyway. Infantry may be dead mean if they're running across a football field toward a tank without any cover, but that's beside the point. right like the drones on a battleship. they can hit the smaller ships but the smaller units can try to fire back. and by the way I'll check out the game for sure, I'm an RTS fan. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:44:00 - [36] now my real what eve needs. I want to play as a bloodraider... badly. and not work for them, but BE a bloodraider. start off in bloodraider space. that would be awesome. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Suyai Valsinjaos Minmatar Sirius Stealth Inc.	Posted - 2007.08.03 16:56:00 - [37] Player Housing! oh wait... nvm... Coming from E&B long ago... I'd like to see support for the aforementioned joystick/rudder control. Planetfall with unpodded missions would be nice.. would give more enjoyment for what is a decently detailed character creation system. Oh.. and Aliens. c'mon.. we need some Aliens.. As far as it being an "Eve II", I don't know as that would be a good idea.. maybe just a massive addon. -------------------------------------------------------- ponders Do I have an avatar yet? facepalm
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 17:03:00 - [38] Originally by: MotherMoon [and by the way I'll check out the game for sure, I'm an RTS fan. C&C 3 has a good solo campaign, but for multiplayer SupCom pwn them all. Now can we please stop derailing the thread? ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Draekas Darkwater Moons of Pluto	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:06:00 - [39] Allowing each person to control squadrons of ships would only add to the lag in a game. Think, a 50v50 player battle in interceptors, would turn into a 1400 ship battle. Can you say server go boom? =D Not that I don't like the idea, but its implementation is perhaps not possible with current computer technology. Unless of course these squadrons are basically just a graphical effect and can't operate independantly. In that case, they would always fly in formation, and die as damage is done. IE, the squadron might have 14k hps total. When 1k damage is done to it, one of the fighters pops. Going the other way might be better, however. For instance, larger ships might have more than one player operating it. To start, maybe something like the Apache helicopter. One to pilot and one gunner. Even larger ships might have even more people. Subsystem targeting on the larger ships could effectively be used to "take out" these extra players from the fight, without having to blow the ship up completely.
Kwint Sommer Incoherent Inc Otaku Invasion	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:13:00 - [40] 1) A stable server without lag or desync. 2) Drones that work properly. 3) Less pointless time sinks 4) Fixing Tactical Shield Manipulation -see my sig for details on just how screwed up this skill is Devs take note, nothing in that list is new. Fix those things and I will be here for at least another year even if nothing new is added and other cool games come out. EVE is f***ing awesome when it works, please make more of it work and work more often.... ---------------------------------------- This Thread needs some Dev lovin but it will take a bump from anyone
Guilliman R Gallente PRO Space Hunters Federation Of united Corps	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:13:00 - [41] I cant think of anything that cant be added here anyway. there's the new streamlined update of the curent game come, including sound and grafic code (to make full use of the new hardware these days) There's walking in stations (that will eventualy trigger walking in motherships (like titans, if you dock) There is planetary interaction, that will eventualy lead to planet excevation of minerals/mass/producs.Aswell as planetary walking It's all stuff we'll be seeing in the (near) future (some of it atleast) I'm most looking forward to the streamlined codes, and the grafic update. I'm really cureus and hoping that it wont just be a tecture update but a whole model-texture-lightning-FX update ---sig--- Carebear for life (unless I am in the advantage and have 99% chance of winning(, hey 1% chance to lose, thats risk right, good!)!*
Death Kill Caldari direkte	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:17:00 - [42] Originally by: Shadowsword Originally by: MotherMoon [and by the way I'll check out the game for sure, I'm an RTS fan. C&C 3 has a good solo campaign, but for multiplayer SupCom pwn them all. Now can we please stop derailing the thread? C&C3 is utter rubbish, its plain crap. Caldari and proud
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:19:00 - [43] Originally by: Shadowsword - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. The day EVE becomes a first-person, twitch based game, is the day I leave EVE. Iknow more than a few people who feel the same way. It's not a whine or a threat. It is just not the game we signed up for. I am happy to leave the amped up kiddies who want a spaz fest at the door (see Angry German Kid for an example of what I mean).
SFShootme The Carebear Stare	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:22:00 - [44] Quote: - Second, About the balance between ships of different classes: don't try to keep each powerfull with artificial unrealist limits like locking time. A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. Try hitting a f16 jetfighter with a tank.... Tho shall give Life, for Life.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:36:00 - [45] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Shadowsword - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. The day EVE becomes a first-person, twitch based game, is the day I leave EVE. Iknow more than a few people who feel the same way. It's not a whine or a threat. It is just not the game we signed up for. I am happy to leave the amped up kiddies who want a spaz fest at the door (see Angry German Kid for an example of what I mean). how said twitch based? joystick control with a compass in the lower corner so you can manualy set your ships X,Y,and Z AXIS. then your ship (shown by a blue dot on the compass) moves to the new dot you have set as the direction to move, and moves to it as fast as that ships agility modifier will allow. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:38:00 - [46] Originally by: Shadowsword - Second, About the balance between ships of different classes: don't try to keep each powerfull with artificial unrealist limits like locking time. A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. It's a frigging battleship ! litterally bristling with guns! I disagree here as well. EVE was "better" when pilots would fly various ship classes to do various things. Now, barring cap ships and a handful of specialty ships, why fly anything else than a battleship? I do not think EVE has been improved by this trend. In real life (and yes I know drawing real life parallels is not always useful but it illustrates the idea) battleships sailed with large formations around them. They needed cruisers and destroyers to round out their defense. No ONE ship type did it all. The naval metaphor fails some for a space game but the idea that one ship generally beats all stinks. Of course a lone frigate should not be able to kill a battleship but it should be able to hamper it enough to be useful while other ships get on with the killing. Hopefully the changes to NOS will to some extent address this.
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:40:00 - [47] Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Shadowsword - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. The day EVE becomes a first-person, twitch based game, is the day I leave EVE. Iknow more than a few people who feel the same way. It's not a whine or a threat. It is just not the game we signed up for. I am happy to leave the amped up kiddies who want a spaz fest at the door (see Angry German Kid for an example of what I mean). how said twitch based? joystick control with a compass in the lower corner so you can manualy set your ships X,Y,and Z AXIS. then your ship (shown by a blue dot on the compass) moves to the new dot you have set as the direction to move, and moves to it as fast as that ships agility modifier will allow. Why use a joystick then? Just do as you do now and click on a direction in space and go that way. I cannot see how a joystick improves anytyhing in your example and even sounds more complicated for no benefit.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:41:00 - [48] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: MotherMoon Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: Shadowsword - First, each ship would be controled by mouse or joystick, first-person view. The day EVE becomes a first-person, twitch based game, is the day I leave EVE. Iknow more than a few people who feel the same way. It's not a whine or a threat. It is just not the game we signed up for. I am happy to leave the amped up kiddies who want a spaz fest at the door (see Angry German Kid for an example of what I mean). how said twitch based? joystick control with a compass in the lower corner so you can manualy set your ships X,Y,and Z AXIS. then your ship (shown by a blue dot on the compass) moves to the new dot you have set as the direction to move, and moves to it as fast as that ships agility modifier will allow. Why use a joystick then? Just do as you do now and click on a direction in space and go that way. I cannot see how a joystick improves anytyhing in your example and even sounds more complicated for no benefit. ok there is a titan or a planet, or a ship or a station or an asteriod or cool object thing. You have to click in open space to move. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:46:00 - [49] Originally by: MotherMoon ok there is a titan or a planet, or a ship or a station or an asteriod or cool object thing. You have to click in open space to move. Sorry...I have a feeling we are just missing what the other is meaning here. I am still not getting where a joystick fits into this though. And if it does how it is in any way better or even preferrable to some. Unless you are flying your ship with a joystick ala a flight sim type deal I just cannot see how a joystick helps.
Brelen	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:51:00 - [50] I'd like to see shards tbh. It gives the server farm some room to breath so we all don't get lagged to hell every time a blob shows up. Also.. allows people to move servers to get a fresh perspective on the political climate. Sooooooo sick of the coalition/alliance politics. (yes this is an alt) I'd like the ability to truly customize the UI. That's one area where other games out there solidly kick CCP's rear end. Take the hand cuffs off, and let us fix it.. (drones + fleet + broadcast spam = unholy mess) I'd like it to be much more difficult to hold and "own" space. If a system hasn't had one of your pilots in it for a week, it's no longer yours.. and I don't care how much expensive shiny crap you've piled up in it. Speaking of piling up expensive shiny crap.. I don't know what the solution to POS warfare is but it's needs to be found. Remote facility in space to store/make/repair ships, mine/refine/manufacture? Absolutely. Staring at one of them for hour after hour in an attempt to take 1 of 30 down just to change "ownership".. gods of fate help us all... that's not fun. I'd like to be able to make X number of jumps in a particular direction with a mining barge, a hauler and a couple of escorts and not see anyone else the entire trip until we get back to the homeworld areas... I want it to really feel as big as space actually is. I'd like to be able to get into a battle with an opposing force and know for a fact that their buddies are a half hour away, not 2 jumps. No Concord, no empire, no security ratings, no PvE. Just some starter systems where if you aren't from that area you are shot end of story.
Mari Onette Amarr	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:52:00 - [51] Sound. ------ I am in blood! Stepp'd in so far that, should I wade no more, it would be as tedious as going over. -MacBeth
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2007.08.03 19:57:00 - [52] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h Originally by: MotherMoon ok there is a titan or a planet, or a ship or a station or an asteriod or cool object thing. You have to click in open space to move. Sorry...I have a feeling we are just missing what the other is meaning here. I am still not getting where a joystick fits into this though. And if it does how it is in any way better or even preferrable to some. Unless you are flying your ship with a joystick ala a flight sim type deal I just cannot see how a joystick helps. because if you want to fly toward an object like a planet you can't. you have to click outside it. you have to click next to an object to align with it. the joystick or wasd, would be a why to manual set your destination. when you somewhere with a lot of asteroids and you want to manuals fly you have to spin the camera, find open space, click in open space, move the camera around again, repeat. why can't I just tell my computer to go 30X20y? The point is point and click would still be there, and in many ways better, but sometimes yuo just want to manual set your direction without having to find empty space. I want to fly straight up in between the stations bars and things, I want to fly up to a titan, move up and then skim across it's surface. if anything I can't see how making it optional would hurt anyone. how about a drag and dorp counter on compass to set your heading? manual control, click somewhere is empty space is clunky, because sometime syou want to move in a direction where is is no empty space. that said if it ever become s twitch fighter I would leave too. but it won't it's eve. ----------------------------------- I'm working my way through college target CCP Quote: CCP posted a new dev blog, they are going to bring Nos in line with.....well....logic
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 20:09:00 - [53] Edited by: Shadowsword on 03/08/2007 20:10:39 Originally by: SFShootme Quote: - Second, About the balance between ships of different classes: don't try to keep each powerfull with artificial unrealist limits like locking time. A battleship is SUPPOSED to kill a lone frigate in seconds. Try hitting a f16 jetfighter with a tank.... Not as impossible as you imply, a Leclerc tank can hit a target 3 meters large, at 2km, while moving hitself at 50km/hour. It's all a matter of gyrostabilized turret, laser targeting, windmeter and a powerfull computer to adjust the aiming. If the F16 wasn't doing evasive maneuvers, a Leclerc could probably hit it. About the lag issue: The squadron would be considered as only one entity by the server (and it would be the server that compute compture battle calculations, to prevent cheating), the multi-ships would be only client-side. With all graphic options it might cause a FPS loss, but not more lag than single ships. The only things that would be different lag-wise, compared to Eve, would be those: - Because of joystick piloting, the heading and speed would be refreshed several times per second (3 to 5 times/sec would be more than enough to have no signifiant, perceptible effect for the players compared to real-time client computations). - The ships wouldn't be a point in space anymore, but real 3D objects, as such they'd need 7 data refreshed (3 for position, 1 for axis orientation, 3 for heading), about 5 times/second. Compared to the point in space, only the axis orientation is added, and that wouldn't be a value changed very often. ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Gabriel Karade Quam Singulari M. PIRE	Posted - 2007.08.03 20:15:00 - [54] 1. True line of sight for all weapons. 2. True collisions between all ships, including when something is trying to warp out (collision preventing the warp). Collisions and collision damage based on the mass and structure HP's of the ships involved 3. Revised missiles, no explosion velocity or radius - if you get hit by a torpedo in a frigate you're dead - end of story, except that, that torpedo has a minimum arming distance and poor manoeuvrability. Oh and splash damage on the big warheads. 4. A revised warping system, basically taking longer to get into warp, particularly larger ships, regardless of alignment (up to 60 seconds in a Battleship). At the same time no warp scramblers. 5. Warping changed so as to prevent gang warps forming 'powerballs' - true formations introduced, warp inaccuracies once hundreds of ships are warping/already on grid. 6. Suppression/temporary damage to discourage all-out focused fire. 7. 'Micro warp drives' being just that - lets you perform a short, several hundred km warp, afterburners boosted to be the tool for closing the range normally. 8. Large 'Short range turrets' meaning 10's of km range not 10's of metres... ---------- Video - 'War-Machine'
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 20:23:00 - [55] Originally by: Imperator Jora'h I disagree here as well. EVE was "better" when pilots would fly various ship classes to do various things. Now, barring cap ships and a handful of specialty ships, why fly anything else than a battleship? I do not think EVE has been improved by this trend. Because a bomber squadron (controled by a single player) would kill you? Not without losing some bombers in the process, but he would have them to lose, while there would be only a single BS of you. Originally by: Imperator Jora'h In real life (and yes I know drawing real life parallels is not always useful but it illustrates the idea) battleships sailed with large formations around them. They needed cruisers and destroyers to round out their defense. No ONE ship type did it all. The naval metaphor fails some for a space game but the idea that one ship generally beats all stinks. Oh, I get what you mean: how to differenciate a destroyer from a cruiser, if both fitted for the same role? Easy, give them different bonuses. For example, a battleship woudl have a bonus for anti-ship weapons, while a destroyer, would have a bonus for defender missiles, to protect neaby ships... Again, just as many possibilities than in Eve. ------------------------------------------ What is Oomph? It the sound Amarr players makes when they get kicked in the ribs.
Alexander Mikailovich Gallente Strix Armaments and Defence Acheron Federation	Posted - 2007.08.03 20:43:00 - [56] Edited by: Alexander Mikailovich on 03/08/2007 20:43:40 1. I agree with a true LoS 2. I also agree with this, make people think twice about spending 20min smacking their ship against you so you can't warp. 3. The first part about no explosion velocity or radius is a bad idea, you would be undermining the whole logic behind an explosion. Minimum arming distance and manuverability sound good, but to keep them effective enough you'd have to increase the damage yield, explosion velocity or radius again conflicting with the first part of this statement. 4. Longer warping times and no disruptors sounds okay, but do you want to increase the time to travel distances by that much time? Normally I could make 10 jumps in about 10 minutes, that's a minute a jump, if you have to sit revving up the warp drive in a battleship for a minute minimum, you've effectively doubled the trip time, I know to many people who whine about how long it takes to get around, this Idea will just increase whines. 5. I don't really have a responce for this one, traditionally, as far as I'm concerned anyway, any inaccurate information when making something as precise as a warp would leave you in an incredible amount of trouble, ie warp core destruction or other major problems. I have no problems with jump accuracy regardless of numbers. 6. Erm... not quite sure how this makes sense, you'd be removing a realistic system and replacing it with a fallicy. 7. Makes sense, but they would be rendered useless since most people already use safe spots to achieve a similar result. 8. Basically you're saying you want something in between railgun and blaster?
Zhaine Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.03 20:46:00 - [57] Beards - - - - - - - - - -
ZeeWolf Asguard Security Service Angels Of Discord	Posted - 2007.08.03 21:00:00 - [58] Originally by: Iyanah i'd like that in eve as it is now. what would i want in eve 2? nothing. the beauty of this game is that they don't need to release a sequel, they can just upgrade the current game. OMG nooooooooo! I'll be stuck as Caldari forver!
Glengrant Minmatar TOHA Heavy Industries OPUS Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.04 00:01:00 - [59] 1. We already have Eve 2. A lot of stuff changed and got added since 4 years ago. The 2.x version number is also a nice hint. :-) 2. There would also be no point as Eve can and will simply be upgraded - it's just a matter of time until we have Eve 3 with stuff like ambulation and planetary interaction. Improvements that I'd like to see with coming upgrades: * Yes to dynamic load balancing * Appropriate missions for scientists * a login screen that doesn't consume insane amounts of cpu for no apparent good reason * Linux client (already announced) * There's a bunch of small stuff where I'd like to see improvements - but most of the stuff I have been waiting for long time has been implemented with recent expansions (sectional wallets, corp asset search, member tacking - managing a non-trivial corp needed all that) * improved mission scripts
NeoShocker Caldari Foundation R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.08.04 00:06:00 - [60] Eve-Online doesn't need a sequel. In fact, the patches are the sequel. :) It'd be Eve-Online 3 already. ----------------------------------- Peace through power!
Daelin Blackleaf No Joy Corp Pride - Honor - Duty	Posted - 2007.08.04 00:24:00 - [61] > Walking on Stations > Factional Warfare > More mission types > Better graphics > Atmospheric Flight > Planetary Interaction I'd also like to see frequent hardware improvements and further efforts made to retain balance between the tactical options provided. In fact I'd like all of these and these. But I'm probably just being greedy, surely no game would go from having no auto-pilot, no alliances, no player built infrastructure and only a few types of ship to being quite so grand and epic in scale... not when a company can follow the excellent market strategies demonstrated by SOE with their highly successful Everquest product line.
Sniser 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2007.08.04 01:04:00 - [62] Originally by: Nigbale Amare I'd just want to say two things : Joystick maneuvring and aiming at 400 ms lag. 10v10 each with his own inty squadron. well Planetside is an MMOFPS i saw battles of around more than 300 guys in the same field. Ping always have been around 40-70ms. Space games doesnt have ground to render. So they can render more ships ;P
Nicholas Barker MASS Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2007.08.04 01:25:00 - [63] Originally by: Zeknichov Originally by: Sazkyen Consensual PvP Colonization of planets, where the elements from planets are different then that found in space and are required for T5 module production. Rather then wars being fought solely from space there would also be ground wars fought with FPS style combat. Space ships couldn't partake in ground wars but they could be used to cut off supplies to the planet. I'd love something like this. Like have stations use supplies you can only get from planets and require a ground base. So when they take over the station and the ground base you can leave guerrillas there who are slowly running out of supplies (like food, ammo, explosives, health packs) Say you need to have so much food per day when you're doing nothing, and doing a day of long walking, or heavy combat with lots of running and such it'll chip away at a sustainence bar or something so you need more food at the end of that day until you totally run out. Also the ability to thief it off the locals. that'd be fun, would probably bring in a lot of people too if you made it a real good FPS mixed with RPG elements (like planetside, only without some of the crap bits) ---
Vincenzo Delloro Amarr Lux et Veritas	Posted - 2007.08.04 01:31:00 - [64] Thargoids!

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [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.