EVE Search - CCP, Where are you going wiith all of these changes?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP, Where are you going wiith all of these changes?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 96 post(s)
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.07 20:31:00 - [91] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Semkhet People log in EvE to have fun. Logistics are a pain in the ass. You should think twice before altering the balance between fun & boredom. Your customers aren't all kiddies paying the subs with daddy's CC. Yeah but too easy logistics are also a pain in the ass. We've been making logistics a lot easier with "jump bridges" and the POS fueling change, the hauling carriers were over the top. I have sort of a question about this, even if you've signed off for the day. What part of 0.0 logistics is considered "too easy"? Do you mean that people should be doing 35+ jump multi-freighter convoys regularly to keep POSes fueled? Should people be mining all of their fuel for POSes and minerals for ships? Building off that, will there be changes to resource gathering that could maybe make this a little easier? For example, Chronotis mentioned in the feedback thread for one of his August blogs that they were considering buffing the Skiff so that it could mine lowend minerals more effectively, or making super-yield asteroids and ices in deep 0.0, and there was a hint at something called "blast mining". Is anything that might make things a little easier a possibility? The thing about carrier-based logistics is that managing POSes is extremely tedious. I can see the point to making it a little bit tedious, but the point is that few people have the stomach to do it dependably. Is there any chance that there could be plans for a little bit of give-and-take when it comes to changing logistics? For example, in Revelations 2.2, the five-POS-per-day anchoring limit was introduced, which made logistics a bit easier since keeping six large POSes going is a lot easier than ten or fifteen. Currently, less than six POS in a station system is practically asking for someone to spam 5 POS before downtime, contesting sovereignty. Unless you reinforce and destroy those POS within a week, you'll lose the system, the station, all the assets inside of it, and all of the built up sovereignty levels. Would you consider reducing the anchoring limit to only three or four per day? I really just can't help but feel concerned for all the logistics people out there. P.S. Last I heard from SiSi, the increased mass of freighters has the possibly unintended side effect that they cannot warp farther than about 40.0 AU. Is there a way to fix that so they don't double or quadruple-jump through every other system?
Sandzibarr A.W.M Ka-Tet	Posted - 2007.11.07 20:36:00 - [92] Originally by: Patch86 This is quite possibly the best thread I've read this year. So many irritating little questions cleared up. 10/10. While we're discussing drone ships, whats the thinking behind the Eos changes? I've not done any hard maths on it, but at first glance it appears that it's overpowered damage (and it was definitely that) is being fixed by reducing drone firepower....while leaving its turret bonuses intact. Which obviously massively irks me as a drone specialist- it's one of relatively few high-end drone ships (along with the Domi and the Ishtar, and maybe the Myrm if you're generous), and it's being dragged further and further in to turret land. Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it's drones where they are (at max 5x unbonused heavys, that still only puts it at around two thirds as powerful as a Domi's bonused drones) and nerf it's turrets instead? Either that or completely redesign the ship without the "CreoDron" label and make it a standard "hybrids+drones" Gallente design from a less specific manufacturer. aye. make the Eos Roden... and then at some point introduce tier2 field commands... and then give us the Creodron version of the Myrmidon :) yummy.
DeadRow Naqam	Posted - 2007.11.07 20:38:00 - [93] Originally by: CCP Nozh Also EVE Balance > RL/Other Sci Fi. As soon as people start comparing EVE to real life or battlestar galactica I stop reading. For real. /DeadRow
Alski Gallente Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.07 21:04:00 - [94] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Semkhet People log in EvE to have fun. Logistics are a pain in the ass. You should think twice before altering the balance between fun & boredom. Your customers aren't all kiddies paying the subs with daddy's CC. Yeah but too easy logistics are also a pain in the ass. We've been making logistics a lot easier with "jump bridges" and the POS fueling change, the hauling carriers were over the top. Any chance you could elaborate on the “over the top” part? I’m not asking in a whiney way, I genuinely don’t understand. -Do you mean that they were being used too far out of there intended role? -Do you mean they were making 0.0 logistics too easy? If so why? Surely jump-freighters will replace Carrier logistics and so if anything will be just as easy, if not easier? -Do you mean that being able to haul, and tank, and fight all at once was the problem? I can assume you probably mean the former, but as I’m sure your aware, this change has gotten a lot of people worried about the how the replacement methods of 0.0 logistics will run without carrier logistics, and it would be nice to pick you and the other devs brains about what exactly they had in mind with this change, actually I’d be nice to have a big chunk of that as part of the devblog on the freighters, its all part of one very big change and I think we all need to hear it. The other thing I wanted to bring up was; we’re going to be in an unusual situation where a method for performing a VITAL part of the game – 0.0 carrier logistics, POSs and sov – is going to have probably the most popular and ingrained method of doing it (carriers) removed, and a replacement method in the form of rorquels and jump freighters introduced BUT with a weeks to months long gap in-between where we will be forced to fall back on old fashioned freighter runs. For many Alliances, probably the largest ones, this is going to be a MASSIVE headache, is this something that you guys have given much thought to? Esp. with jump-freighters being a T2 item with massively long production times? Again this go’s back to communication, in the opinion of many of us, it would have been better if we could have been told about CCPs plans and thoughts of this change before it was set in stone, the later we get the information the less time we have to prepare, and much of the valued “player created content” out of 0.0 is at stake, balance changes on a code level should not even risk effecting player created content/alliances/space in the actual game, this is one change that does. - (combat) Patch belonging to CCP hits your drones, wrecking their liberty and freedom.
Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.11.07 21:45:00 - [95] Edited by: Rells on 07/11/2007 21:46:40 Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Semkhet People log in EvE to have fun. Logistics are a pain in the ass. You should think twice before altering the balance between fun & boredom. Your customers aren't all kiddies paying the subs with daddy's CC. Yeah but too easy logistics are also a pain in the ass. We've been making logistics a lot easier with "jump bridges" and the POS fueling change, the hauling carriers were over the top. First of all, thanks for replying to my thread. Second of all, I have to disagree with you here. The fact that is that jump bridges are a toy for a superalliance. They are totally out of reach for 99% of the player base. Jump feighters wont make logistics easy, but harder. The fact is that rigs were introduced into the game a while back and now there are thousands of ships fitted with them. People cant just obliterate 50 million in rigs to move a ship from A to B. Second of all, the freighter can easily be killed by 10 battleships in the time it takes for the session timer to expire to redock. That is not a sustainable strategy. They dont need to chew through your force, just go right for the multi-billion isk loaded freighter. I posted some jump freighter reccomendations on the game development forum to help them become what they are targeted at but I feel quite ignored on that one. Another changes I object to are The speed nerfs to the interdictors (they are made of paper and primary target man). The sabre was a bit powerful but the answer was to fix the flycatcher (reduce its weight by 30%) and other interdictors, not nerf them all. As for scripts, I wouldnt care if the script loaded attributes for the modules was the same as the current values. The fact is that even with a script loaded, damps have been hit with a 40% nerf and other script modules havent fared much better. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Bein Glorious GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.11.07 21:51:00 - [96] To be honest, I don't think the jump freighter is meant to replace the logistics carrier. It seems like it's meant to be a fuel-inefficient alternative that you can use to get through a chokepoint; you pay more for fuel but get relatively certain safe transport. I think they want people to either freighter the fuel from empire or mine it themselves and distribute it with industrials and transports. There will be a lot of growing pains if that is the case...
PCaBoo RennTech SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:01:00 - [97] Originally by: Patch86 While we're discussing drone ships, whats the thinking behind the Eos changes? I've not done any hard maths on it, but at first glance it appears that it's overpowered damage (and it was definitely that) is being fixed by reducing drone firepower....while leaving its turret bonuses intact. Which obviously massively irks me as a drone specialist- it's one of relatively few high-end drone ships (along with the Domi and the Ishtar, and maybe the Myrm if you're generous), and it's being dragged further and further in to turret land. Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it's drones where they are (at max 5x unbonused heavys, that still only puts it at around two thirds as powerful as a Domi's bonused drones) and nerf it's turrets instead? Either that or completely redesign the ship without the "CreoDron" label and make it a standard "hybrids+drones" Gallente design from a less specific manufacturer. I believe they call that an astarte. I'm an actual command ship pilot. I use my fleet command ship to fit 3 gang mods... to lose my heavies is a real slap in the face. Everything is being watered down and homogenized... which really defeats the purpose of having multiple races and ships (although, obviously CCP wants you to train everything and keep paying your subs). Some nerfs are necessary, i'm sure everyone understands this, but at what price do we pay to keep things "fair" for everyone? ________________________________ Stop nerfing everything!
Redback911 Malevolent Intentions	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:16:00 - [98] Originally by: Rells The fact is that rigs were introduced into the game a while back and now there are thousands of ships fitted with them. People cant just obliterate 50 million in rigs to move a ship from A to B. Ah dude, didn't you get the memo? Theyre being buffed for carrying fitted ships... Can even carry ammo and boosters in holds as well apparently.
Helison Gallente Times of Ancar Pure.	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:39:00 - [99] Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Semkhet People log in EvE to have fun. Logistics are a pain in the ass. You should think twice before altering the balance between fun & boredom. Your customers aren't all kiddies paying the subs with daddy's CC. Yeah but too easy logistics are also a pain in the ass. We've been making logistics a lot easier with "jump bridges" and the POS fueling change, the hauling carriers were over the top. Hi Nozh! I myself have suggested a nerf to carrier hauling before you started to mess with them. BUT: We need first a good substitution for carrier-hauling, otherwise specially the medium and smaller sized alliances (without jumpbridges and titans) will get massive problems with logistics. My adapted plan would be: In Kali3(=Trinity): Introducing jump-freighters: They should cost about 2B ISK and should be buildable within 2 weeks. If this is impossible for T2, then you should make them Tier2. Carriers should stay in Kali3 like they are now. About 3-5 months after Kali3 you can start to nerf the hauling-capabilities of carriers. I personally would make this NOT with disallowing cargo in the scooped ships, BUT by increasing the volume of Industrials. If they have a bigger volume than 1M m3, it¦s impossible to move them with carriers. Problem solved. And with this solution we would have much less other problems like "you can¦t scoop this frigate, because it has one looted afterburner in cargo". Helison.
JamnOne Amarr	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:40:00 - [100] In response just to the title: Devs: "To hell if we don't change our ways" ________________________ Originally by: CCP Prism X Hah! Vengeance is sweet!

Rells Caldari Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:42:00 - [101] Originally by: Redback911 Originally by: Rells The fact is that rigs were introduced into the game a while back and now there are thousands of ships fitted with them. People cant just obliterate 50 million in rigs to move a ship from A to B. Ah dude, didn't you get the memo? Theyre being buffed for carrying fitted ships... Can even carry ammo and boosters in holds as well apparently. I know that but jump freighters should be able to pack the assembled ships in. You cant take them out of the freighter in space so there is no balance issue. Read my thread on jump freighters that I linked. Four years is long enough to leave the corp interface broken!
Necrologic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:44:00 - [102] I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? _____________________ In the arena of logic I fight unarmed.
Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:56:00 - [103] Edited by: Elmicker on 07/11/2007 22:56:25 Originally by: CCP Nozh the hauling carriers were over the top. In what way? Fuelling POSes with carriers takes literally hundreds of man hours of work, and using carriers to haul ships and modules is exactly within their role. Nerfing carrier logistics will simply make people turn to dreadnoughts, which can do exactly the same job.
PCaBoo RennTech SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.07 22:57:00 - [104] Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? I think CCP wanted to give the industrial guys a break. Hence JB's and the coming jump-freighters. ________________________________ Stop nerfing everything!
Necrologic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:07:00 - [105] Originally by: Elmicker Edited by: Elmicker on 07/11/2007 22:56:25 Originally by: CCP Nozh the hauling carriers were over the top. In what way? Fuelling POSes with carriers takes literally hundreds of man hours of work, and using carriers to haul ships and modules is exactly within their role. Nerfing carrier logistics will simply make people turn to dreadnoughts, which can do exactly the same job. I always thought carries were fleet support ships meant for combat logistics (shield and armor transferring). "Sensing the need for a more moderately-priced version of the Nyx, Federation Navy authorities commissioned the design of the Thanatos. Designed to act primarily as a fighter carrier for small- to mid-scale engagements, its significant defensive capabilities and specially-fitted fighter bays make it ideal for its intended purpose." The description of the Thanatos doesn't meantion it being a pos fueler, and neither does the description of any other race's carrier. This leads me to the conclusion that carriers were not intended as pos fuelers, and so the fact that they are being used for it so often is kind of a dead give away that the hauling carriers were over the top, exactly as Nozh has said. Yes, POSing fueling is a *****. But if people think its out of line they should be arguing for a fix to that, one that is inline with CCPs vision of the game. We should not be arguing to keep the bandaid that is overpowered to the point of bordering on exploitation. Let CCP fix carriers, AND argue for a fix to POS fueling if you think its such a problem. _____________________ In the arena of logic I fight unarmed.
Necrologic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:08:00 - [106] Originally by: PCaBoo Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? I think CCP wanted to give the industrial guys a break. Hence JB's and the coming jump-freighters. Both of which have problems, as pointed out by many people in this thread. They have elements of risk much more inline with the benefits of the industry. _____________________ In the arena of logic I fight unarmed.
shinsushi	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:08:00 - [107] Edited by: shinsushi on 07/11/2007 23:09:23 Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? Aren't they doing exactly that in the form of jump freighters though? I actually think jump freighters are going to be even more secure way to transport goods than carriers. Here is how. 1)buy cheap fuel in jita or wherever 2)jump to 0.4 3) cyno out as soon as you decloak. 4)......... 5) profit. EDIT: now that I think about it.... jump freights will pretty much never have to goto lowsec... they can cyno in on low-sec gates to jump into high-sec too. ☺☻☺☻☺ SO how do you get me to stop posting? Bump this thread Until devs answer
HenkieBoy	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:13:00 - [108] Quote: Racial Freighter 4 Jump Freighters 1 Jump Calibration 1 Can somebody tell me what this means in learning time? I got Minmatar Industrial lvl4, is this the 'Racial Freigher' skill? And what are the req. for those other 2? Sorry, I am one of them that is fairly new at this game ;) I do think changes a good, it allows new things to be introduced. Just look at those fantasy MMO's, they begin with +50 attribute on the best item, they introduce +60 on the expansion, +70 on the next expansion... etc.. it gets stupid while time goes on. I mean, what stats would you give a T3 ships? 99% resist? I do understand people will be let down if they see their expensive ship can't be used anymore for the role they bought it for. If ISK is the case, CCP could introduce some NPC's that will buy expensive ships for a while. This will give the ISK back to allow them to buy the right ship the need for the role intended.
Necrologic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:13:00 - [109] Originally by: shinsushi Edited by: shinsushi on 07/11/2007 23:09:23 Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? Aren't they doing exactly that in the form of jump freighters though? I actually think jump freighters are going to be even more secure way to transport goods than carriers. Here is how. 1)buy cheap fuel in jita or wherever 2)jump to 0.4 3) cyno out as soon as you decloak. 4)......... 5) profit. EDIT: now that I think about it.... jump freights will pretty much never have to goto lowsec... they can cyno in on low-sec gates to jump into high-sec too. There is a good deal of discussion and whining around the forums lately talking about the various problems jump freighters face and how they won't fully replace carriers if carrier logistics get the bat. _____________________ In the arena of logic I fight unarmed.
PCaBoo RennTech SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:14:00 - [110] Originally by: shinsushi Edited by: shinsushi on 07/11/2007 23:09:23 Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? Aren't they doing exactly that in the form of jump freighters though? I actually think jump freighters are going to be even more secure way to transport goods than carriers. Here is how. 1)buy cheap fuel in jita or wherever 2)jump to 0.4 3) cyno out as soon as you decloak. 4)......... 5) profit. EDIT: now that I think about it.... jump freights will pretty much never have to goto lowsec... they can cyno in on low-sec gates to jump into high-sec too. you can't cyno into hi-sec ________________________________ Stop nerfing everything!

Elmicker Black Sea Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:16:00 - [111] But it's not overpowered... If you honestly think that, you've never had to keep a POS chain alive relying solely on carriers. There seems to be a distinct lack of actual carrier experience behind the nerfs. First we're told that their dps output is overpowered (not true), then we're told their remote-rep capability is overpowered (not true except 1 specific situation) and now we're told that their logistical capbilities are also overpowered. Admittedly, we were only told this *******s through an absolute collapse in communication (Hi Zulupark!), but it showed the underlying reasoning behind it. It took a 110 page thread to get CCP to admit that it was not the individual mechanics that were overpowered, but their use in a pure carrier blob. Again, CCP missed the point in that it was the blob that was the problem, not the carriers. Nerfing an individual ship's capabilities to make up for flaws in the game's mechanics should not be a valid design strategy. Carriers should still be able to do logistics in the same capacity they can now, but they should be nowhere near as useful as the jump freighters. This would allow jump freighters to take over the supply lines and the POSes, leaving carriers to do their job of combat logistical support - providing new ships (with alternate fits on board) to combat zones.
shinsushi	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:21:00 - [112] Originally by: PCaBoo Originally by: shinsushi Edited by: shinsushi on 07/11/2007 23:09:23 Originally by: Necrologic I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that logistics were not meant to be as easy as carries make them. People keep saying that if a new substitute isn't added that there will be major problems. It seems clear to me that there are supposed to be major problems. How much risk is there in jumping carriers around to fuel posses? How much risk is there in using carriers to transport your goodies out of 0.0? Carriers allow you to circumvent the intended amounts of risk and reward in the game, and so they are fixing them. Why would they give you a new way to get out of the risk? Aren't they doing exactly that in the form of jump freighters though? I actually think jump freighters are going to be even more secure way to transport goods than carriers. Here is how. 1)buy cheap fuel in jita or wherever 2)jump to 0.4 3) cyno out as soon as you decloak. 4)......... 5) profit. EDIT: now that I think about it.... jump freights will pretty much never have to goto lowsec... they can cyno in on low-sec gates to jump into high-sec too. you can't cyno into hi-sec Right, cyno onto a gate would work just fine aswell, although I am not sure if you would have to wait the 30 secs to activate the gate or not (session change and all.) Either way, you present much less of a target than haulers/freighters jumping into your local 0.4 station would, as long as your smart about it. Also, you would never present a target jumping out of high-sec, since you can completely bypass low-sec with cargoholds being full. ☺☻☺☻☺ SO how do you get me to stop posting? Bump this thread Until devs answer
Necrologic Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:23:00 - [113] Originally by: Elmicker Edited by: Elmicker on 07/11/2007 23:16:39 Quote: We should not be arguing to keep the bandaid that is overpowered... But it's not overpowered... If you honestly think that, you've never had to keep a POS chain alive relying solely on carriers. Allow me to clarify: Overpowered in comparison to intended industrial ships. Working on the assumption that carriers were never intended to be used for fueling posses and that we are supposed to be using regular indies and frieghtors, carriers make the job way easier than it was intended to be. As i said, i am not contesting that POS fueling is very time consuming and tedious. I am simply saying that carriers were never meant for it, and that it is up to CCP to decide how hard pos fueling is really supposed to be. They cannot tweak it with the current state of carriers. Leaving carriers as they are and making jump freighters even better is still working against the point that pos fueling is easier than CCP intends, assuming that regular indies and freightors is how they intended it to be done. _____________________ In the arena of logic I fight unarmed.
Torco	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:23:00 - [114] what do you say about all the Amarr-Threads??
sapanda1102222	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:33:00 - [115] Originally by: DreadMasters Because CCP are doing what every failing game is Slamming lots more new content in, in a vain hope that people won't quit, they lost over 20k subs last year alone. The fact that they would rather add new content than fix the server problems pretty much says how they think - Long as you keep paying we will be ignored. Customer service is **** anyway customer service isnt s^^^ its good until you have a problem with something a gm did then there is no wrong performed and you will be ignored until whatever the gm decided even if ultimately wrong has elapsed and only then will they pat you on the head and tell you there there it wasnt so bad was it
Ruciza	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:54:00 - [116] Edited by: Ruciza on 07/11/2007 23:55:07 You can't cyno into high sec, but can you cyno out of high sec? There are two new ship classes incoming that have a jump drive and can still enter high sec...
Viqer Fell Minmatar Trinity Nova KIA Alliance	Posted - 2007.11.07 23:58:00 - [117] Originally by: CCP Nozh The "hactors" (like someone very clever started calling them) Thank you. I shall now sit back and enjoy my glory. Click here to visit our site
Emperor D'Hoffryn No Quarter. Vae Victis.	Posted - 2007.11.08 00:04:00 - [118] Edited by: Emperor D''Hoffryn on 08/11/2007 00:04:44 Originally by: Bein Glorious Originally by: CCP Nozh Originally by: Semkhet People log in EvE to have fun. Logistics are a pain in the ass. You should think twice before altering the balance between fun & boredom. Your customers aren't all kiddies paying the subs with daddy's CC. Yeah but too easy logistics are also a pain in the ass. We've been making logistics a lot easier with "jump bridges" and the POS fueling change, the hauling carriers were over the top. I have sort of a question about this, even if you've signed off for the day. What part of 0.0 logistics is considered "too easy"? Do you mean that people should be doing 35+ jump multi-freighter convoys regularly to keep POSes fueled? Should people be mining all of their fuel for POSes and minerals for ships? Building off that, will there be changes to resource gathering that could maybe make this a little easier? For example, Chronotis mentioned in the feedback thread for one of his August blogs that they were considering buffing the Skiff so that it could mine lowend minerals more effectively, or making super-yield asteroids and ices in deep 0.0, and there was a hint at something called "blast mining". Is anything that might make things a little easier a possibility? The thing about carrier-based logistics is that managing POSes is extremely tedious. I can see the point to making it a little bit tedious, but the point is that few people have the stomach to do it dependably. Is there any chance that there could be plans for a little bit of give-and-take when it comes to changing logistics? For example, in Revelations 2.2, the five-POS-per-day anchoring limit was introduced, which made logistics a bit easier since keeping six large POSes going is a lot easier than ten or fifteen. Currently, less than six POS in a station system is practically asking for someone to spam 5 POS before downtime, contesting sovereignty. Unless you reinforce and destroy those POS within a week, you'll lose the system, the station, all the assets inside of it, and all of the built up sovereignty levels. Would you consider reducing the anchoring limit to only three or four per day? I really just can't help but feel concerned for all the logistics people out there. P.S. Last I heard from SiSi, the increased mass of freighters has the possibly unintended side effect that they cannot warp farther than about 40.0 AU. Is there a way to fix that so they don't double or quadruple-jump through every other system? the changes would seem indicate that you should put up less POS. If everyone put up less POS, I think the game would be immensly better, and alot of issues would be fixed. However, Other game mechanics still dictate all the POS you can put up. We really need to change it so that you dont REQUIRE as many POSes, as well as making logistics mean something. Cause Logisitics SHOULD mean something...if you use proper teamwork and reduce time required for all involved cause you got alot of peeps involved, you win....if you dont/cant, you deserve to fail. Difficulty: Impossible balance to actually achieve. Originally by: Snuggly It's just so great to have an actual reason to not die, incentive is fantastic!
Acoco Osiris Gallente Sublime.	Posted - 2007.11.08 00:05:00 - [119] Wow, a thread discussing the changes which actually has dev input. Anyways, here's my 0.02 ISK. Most of the changes were in the right direction, but too severe The Myrmidon having no more drone control than the Vexor makes me cry. Even 5 mbit more for a 3/2 combo would make my day. The torp DPS boost for a range cut was again, in the right direction, but giving the Raven gank-Mega like damage at more than hugging distance is a bit too far. Meanwhile, short-range missiles are extra-ordinarily long-range. However, heavy ACs and pulses handily out-range them. Heck, mega neutron IIs with Null L can out-range torpedoes at less than one falloff. ------------------------------ One more soldier off to war... And one Velator in my hangars.
Oz Borne Naughty 40 Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.11.08 00:08:00 - [120] I love how they decide something wasnt designed to fulfill a role after they have already been in the game years. priceless. -------------------



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 24 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.