| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues
EVE Rogues Alliance
100
   |
Posted - 2012.01.26 18:13:00 -
[31] - Quote
Dierdra Vaal wrote:Statements should be unambiguous (meaning: no more than one interpretation)
This is EVE. What you are asking is impossible to accomplish. For example: Beer? One word, yet so many different interpretations.
I'll give it a go anyway 
- Nullsec is of greater importance than Lowsec or Highsec
- Lowsec is of greater importance than Nullsec or Highsec
- Highsec is of greater importance than Lowsec or Nullsec
- Tech 3 ships should be better developed
- We need more Tech 3 ships in game
- I would like to see the introduction of Tech 3 modules
- Iteration is important
- Iteration of existing in space features should be a priority
- Iteration of existing Incarna features should be a priority
- Iteration on all levels is important
- Ships need to be buffed, except for Super-Caps and Titans
- Buffing Lower Tier Tech 1 Ships should be a priority
- Selectively nerfing ships is needed to help balance the game
- We should nerf all ships of a non-industrial variety
- Buffing Capitals and Sub-Caps would help to balance Super-Caps
- Moons need to be accessible everywhere
- Moons should only be accessible in Nullsec
- Moons should be accessible in both Lowsec and Nulsec
- CCP are good developers and I respect them and what they have accomplished in developing EVE
- Wormholes are too secure
- Wormhole mechanics need a change
- We need more ways to disrupt Wormhole activity as players
- Wormholes are too inaccessible
- Incursions need greater iteration and balance
- Incursion payouts need to be fixed
- Incursion should pay everybody that runs them and not just a select few.
- Griefing is too prevalent in EVE
- Mechanics in EVE make it to easy to gank players in Highsec
- Ganking and Griefing in EVE suffers little or no consequence to the players participating in it
- PvP should be less consensual
- Morals have no place in EVE
- DirectX 10 and 11 should be available for EVE players to enhance game quality
- Industry as a whole needs iteration and development
- Only certain aspects of Industry are important
- More forms of Industry should be available to the playerbase
- Changes to the game UI and graphics are not needed, and development should be focused elsewhere
- There should be more options to save and export/import settings in the game
- We need the ability to save and export/import Fleet configurations and settings
- It should be possible to save specific wardrobe outfits so character customization isn't required all the time
- More tabs on the overview would be nice
- Cloaking is too safe and should be changed, or a counter should be introduced
- AFK cloaking is a hindrance to my and others gameplay
- When cloaked, you should be completely invulnerable
- Price is not important when determining how powerful a ship should be
- All ships should have the ability to defend themselves based on how costly they are
- Lowsec needs iteration and new features
- Highsec needs iteration and new features
- Nullsec needs iteration and new features
- Faction Warfare needs iteration and new features
- Security levels in EVE should shift and change over time
- Borders between sovereign territory in Highsec and Lowsec should shift and change dynamically
- We should be able to influence the change of security levels in a system directly and intentionally as individuals
- Player actions should bring about changes to security levels over time
- Player actions should have a direct influence on Faction NPC control of sovereignity in Highsec and Lowsec
- Player actions should have a direct influence on NPC sovereignity in Nullsec
- Players should be able to choose to start play as a pirate faction, provided they have a veteran account in the game
- Pirate NPC Factions should not be available to players
- If I had an interest in Incarna, I would say it should directly reflect the security level of systems and have PvP available
- If I had an interest in Incarna, I would say that it should focus on Social interactions
- If I had an interest in Incarna, I would say that it should allow multiple forms of interaction between Dust 514 and EVE
- If I had an interest in Incarna, I would say it should eventually allow players to travel between space and planets
- I have no interest in Incarna
- EVE should be 100% PvP, and we should do away with Concord and Security levels in systems all-together
- There needs to be more solo content available
- There needs to be more group activities available
- Solo players are unwelcome in EVE, and should find another game
- All players are welcome in EVE as it adds to the diversity of the playerbase
Well, there's a few
TIIP: The Incredible Invisible Poster |
Zixie Draco
Tactical Knightmare
47
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 18:24:00 -
[32] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Jafit McJafitson wrote:If elected to CSM I will strive to implement some kind of basic IQ test or critical thinking exam before people are allowed to post on the Eve-O forums. Atypical arrogance from this idiot and even more funny when considering he couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel. But then he could never be considered as an opinionated control freak I suppose? Reverse psychology correction therapy exert XBY-14
As to sensible suggestion to the topic it might be interesting to see some ethical dilemma questions aswell as the listed topical material. I personally consider that although valid, its too debilitating to simply stick to current issues only, as the idea of CSM is to propose uinque ideas and express themselves with solutions to issues in the playerbase. So whilst its important to be aware of the current picture it is more vital to understand a person's view to EvE. That I realise may not be an easy ask to simply place into a questinairre, which is why I might be skeptical to its benefit. I'd prefer like others to see the campaigners manifesto in a holistic manner than pandering to individual opinionated limitations. After all if you want someone to be able to think out of the box, surely better to not place them in one to begin with?
I like you
Would you like a kitten? |
Jafit McJafitson
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
206
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 18:49:00 -
[33] - Quote
If this is your youtube channel (which is the only reason to link me to such a pointless video with 35 views) then I'd like to inform you that your portfolio of 3d and graphic design is almost as terrible as your posting. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
117
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 19:00:00 -
[34] - Quote
Jafit McJafitson wrote:If this is your youtube channel (which is the only reason to link me to such a pointless video with 35 views) then I'd like to inform you that your portfolio of 3d and graphic design is almost as terrible as your posting.
lol, its not actually, something i found, but nice to see you consistant in your delussional interpretation of things.
"All griefers are lazy cowards with the current climate of broken player policing systems." |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa
Stark Enterprises
1134
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 19:19:00 -
[35] - Quote
I need incarna now!
Super caps are not over powered enough!
Blobbing must be made useless
yay for passive income
death to scammers
Occupancy should remain seperate from Sovereignty ->allow occupancy in hisec / renting low sec outposts at cost of being in FW
death to griefers
add more pvp content
expand on pve
incursions are not hard enough
death to wh towers
more nex store items! -> top hats, lingerie, full body tattoos
|
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
154
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 19:48:00 -
[36] - Quote
- The Omniscient Local Chat should be replaced with an intel system with a balanced fog of war.
- Sov Mechanics need objectives appropriate for small gangs to accomplish.
- The rewards of PvE should be primarily balanced around the need for Teamwork, Preparations, and Investment.
- The rewards of PvE should be primarily balanced around the threat to your ship, be it NPC and/or Player threats.
- With the current NPC spawning system, NPC's provide a substantial, viable, and appropriate threat to Player Ships.
- Imbalances between ships of similar class (ex: tier 2 BC's) that result in FOTM are not only acceptable, but good for the game.
- While balancing ship capability with isk is taboo, it's still appropriate for sub-supercapital ships.
- Non-consensual PvP is a core mechanic of EvE, but it should be limited to protect PvE'ers that don't enjoy that aspect of the game.
- Revitalizing the wardec mechanics should include penalties to aggressors like an inability to accept new members.
- Game mechanics like wardec shields and wardec shedding are broken, and need to be fixed.
|
Zixie Draco
Tactical Knightmare
47
|
Posted - 2012.01.26 20:48:00 -
[37] - Quote
This, my friends, is pure genius...and why I'm voting for Skippermonkey for CSM
Would you like a kitten? |
Dierdra Vaal
Veto.
Veto Corp
81
|
Posted - 2012.01.27 10:37:00 -
[38] - Quote
Some good suggestions here :)
Never stop posting!
Veto #205
* * *
Director Emeritus at EVE University
* * *
CSM1 delegate, CSM3 chairman and CSM5 vice-chairman |
Zorok
LEGI0N
1
|
Posted - 2012.02.08 08:34:00 -
[39] - Quote
How about a statement that says, "Eve should provide additional tools (more resistant ships or defensive devices/modules) to industrial players to assist with defense against PvPers"
Right now, the industrial players simply log out since it's the easiest way to avoid risking an industrial ship. I say that there should be a log off timer where a ship will stay put but in return give the industrial players something that can give them a somewhat fighting chance. The biggest issue is that without using alts, not many folks want to sit around and babysit a mining op for hours on end. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |