|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
126
   |
Posted - 2012.02.10 00:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'll skip the part describing that I've tried all EVE professions and so on, which - while being true and perfectly applicable for my case - is something every CSM candidate should have done by default.
My main interest within the game have always been small-scale PvP and that's the area I seem to be decently good at. Let my movies speak for me here.
Really enjoying rich, thrilling and creative environment this way of gaming provides, I can safely state there are certain things I'd like to see changed/fixed/improved for the benefit of those sharing - in general - my view and my idea of fun in EVE. I'm pretty confident that my pathological aspiration for truth may cost me some votes.
That said, I'm still going to list my thoughts on an appreciable number of questions. This includes, but is not limited to: rigs, cyno mechanics, buffer and active tanking, Electronic Warfare, overused modules, capitals and supercapitals, low-sec space and a number of other issues we deal with on a daily basis.
So, things I'd like to see addressed:
1) Rigs. All of them.
Rigs have never been changed (bare very few units) since the very introduction of them in 2006! Some of them are way too good (popularity speaks for itself), some just don't induce proper penalties, some don't have penalties at all, some aren't even stacking penalized while costing merely 50 calibration points and providing very useful bonuses. Insanity, to put it mildly.
2) Buffer vs. active tanking.
Tanking in general is a very powerful ability. It doesn't matter what the ship itself does on a battlefield or how it's affected by other stuff, but it still dies by taking damage. One's ability to tank that damage is to come with proper cost. At the moment active tanking comes with: high CPU and grid requirements, high capacitor usage. On the other hand, current buffer tanking, while being very potent and popular (yet again, numbers speak for themselves), is hardly associated with any significant penalties. That is especially true for shield tanking, where increase of signature radius is simply a (bad) joke.
There's a great number of ways we can improve buffer tanking (so that it becomes balanced), but the idea of decreasing mobility for using HP modules is something hardly anyone will argue with. Decreased mobility should be there no matter whether you go for shield or armour. Wanna move fast(er)? Go for active tanking then. What is really cool, it's the fact this change hardly affects fleet warfare: the difference between everyone going at 1km/s and say 700-800 is pretty much non-existent. Great Nano Fix reduced velocity values by about the same margin, yet people still blob just fine.
I'm surely perfectly fine with CCP introducing instead some other proper penalties for buffer tanking, but these changes should then come in significant shifts - you can not just increase PG usage of pesky Large Shield Extenders by 20 MWs and consider it done. Nothing will change.
As for repairing/boosting values, these are fine as they are. Increasing them will just ruin small-scale PvP. We don't want to meet unbreakable monsters on each gate. The game is meant to be fun and dynamic, so the stuff must explode. Increasing tanking values just forces people to bring more numbers with them and that's it. By the way, that's why there are so much blobs around - the whole game is already overtanked (thanks to buffer tanking being so good) and people can't achieve anything within reasonable timeframe without bringing in a gazillion of teammates. Or at least they think they can't, which is a whole another story - I've already tried my best busting these myths with my movies, so please don't make me elaborate on it here with mere words at my disposal.
3) Cyno mechanics
Just as rigs, cynoes haven't been changed since they were initially released. Or at least I as a 2005 player can't recall anything in this regard. Current primitive mechanics was probably OK for the old days where capitals were few and the galaxy was vast, but became totally inacceptable even by 2009, much less nowadays.
Let's just face it - being able to throw in a ship instantly while retaining its combat capabilities is really overpowered. More so for small-scale PvP. As a player with massive game experience, I'm perfectly fine with power-blocs and other blobs hot-dropping each other 23/7, they may enjoy this as much as they want to.
However, there's not a single reason for the same rules to apply both in a) on an 'epic' battlefield with thousands of ships present and b) on a gate or belt where some casual dude in his cruiser meats another one. We can easily make separate cynoes to meet ultimate game needs. An these needs are governed by balance. So, that's how I for one see it:
- sovereignty warfare cyno. Can be activated only withing sov structures, such as POSes, outposts, claim units etc. Heck, I think I'll be fine with that new cyno even if they make no further changes and don't introduce any of these (needed) features: spool-up timer, resistances penalties, inability for the cyno- equipped ship to lock things upon cyno activation, disclosuring bloom around cyno-equipped ship, proper cyno cost, proper CPU/grid usage etc.
- general combat cyno. Can be activated at any location, but goes with spool-up timer, which can be of inverse relation to the number of ships present in grid, so the more ships are there, the sooner hot-drop arrives. It's surely welcome to introduce some additional features (like disclosuring bloom) and make some tweaks (so that killing a cyno-fitted ships brings you some isk in loot), but an instantaneous power-projection should be fixed no matter what.
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
126
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 00:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
- covert cyno. May even retain its current stats, but I personally believe spool-up will greatly improve it, too. But it's also important to note that this point is very dependent on how CCP is resistant to clueless screams advocating for Black Ops buff. Black Ops are mostly fine and any changes beyond Sin overhaul and probably minor tweaks here and there (fuel bay etc.) will result in this shipclass being way too attractive while still remaining next to impossible to counter. We surely don't want this to happen. Covert-ops and any kind of 'silent' and 'safe' engaging should never be comparable to regular combat means.
4) Overused modules
- Tracking Enhancers provide way too good falloff bonus and result in making autocannons FOTM and blasterboats even less appealing. I'm a firm believer that it's not the range of blasters we need to blame, but rather the fact how great is the range of missiles and how massively OP Tracking Enhancers became with Dominion. So, falloff bonus for both Tracking Enhancers and Tracking Computers is to get reduced to 15% (for tech2), which is in line with the general game spirit: check rig and implant values - all pairs there provide equal bonuses for falloff and optimal.
- Damage Control. It's way too good. It's used so often that it might as well be built-in. If something is that popular we should always ask ourselves - is it actually good for the game? As for me, I'm pretty sure DC is to be brought down somehow.
!! to be continued by:
5) Electronic Warfare
6) Combat Recons vs. Force Recons - better defined roles etc.
7) Danger of new supercapitals (speculations)
8) Heavy missiles range
9) Cruise missiles
etc.
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
126
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 00:13:00 -
[3] - Quote
reserved
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
126
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 00:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
reserved yet again
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
250
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 13:44:00 -
[5] - Quote
I'll try to get some points added in the weekend.
Any questions on stuff already covered 
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
310
|
Posted - 2012.02.10 22:52:00 -
[6] - Quote
StarXaker wrote:+1. I don't care about his views. if he wants to make our game better - he'll get my vote
Thanks. I really feel like a politician now, with people pulling out totally irrelevant stuff as innuendos.
Anyways, back to the point.
Post #2 has been updated with the following:
5) Electronic Warfare
6) Combat Recons vs. Force Recons
2008, CCP Zulu(park): "command ships are fine as is"
2011, CCP Greyscale: "is the Nighthawk actually underpowered?"
Nice progress, guys. |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
361
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 05:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jowen Datloran wrote:People like you need no platform to run on so save yourself the work.
I've got no idea whether you're not kidding and thus prefer to reinforce my speech 
7) speculations and thoughts on (new) supercapitals
has been added. I hope this paragraph meets your views, too.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
383
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 09:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:What are your views on NPC corps and do you have any aversion towards the idea of getting rid of them and replacing them with wardecable individuals?
I'm perfectly fine with NPC corps as long as they have their limitations intact. I guess 11% taxrate serves its purpose well, but should CCP consider increasing it a bit, I'll be all for it.
My greatest convern with war decs is corp-hopping. I've always considered that as an exploit.
But then again, I do think there are much more serious issues out there, so I'd like to see them addressed first. It's always a matter of setting priorities 
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
400
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 21:31:00 -
[9] - Quote
testobjekt wrote:Do you support limiting NPC corps to players that cant fly freighters/jf
I'm pretty neutral in this regard. First of all, I for one don't see that being an issue, but if anyone else within CSM or CCP does, we'll have a discussion and I'll try getting the ideas of both parties.
There might be several issues tied into one. For instance, is suicide ganking a problem on its own or it's just artillery damage mod being too high? I think the latter one is valid.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
401
|
Posted - 2012.02.12 23:56:00 -
[10] - Quote
Doris Dents wrote:I think being neo-**** trash is very relevant to your campaign. I wouldn't do business with a ****, be friends with one and certainly not vote for one even in a fake spaceships election. I can see why you'd want to play down this odious side of your character though. Get some mental help.
So you pay attention to perverted gossips spread by unknown tards and take them seriously? Who of us two needs mental help then?
Simply amazing.
\o/ |
|
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
409
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 00:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
Yeah, I'd need to address this 'issue' with my next movie, which is on the way.
It's always better to have first-hand experience instead of distorted perversions. I for one would prefer to keep politics out of EVE, but since some are that moronic, I'll respond to it the way I can.
Since it's not like I'm afraid or ashamed of anything I've ever stated on forums or IRL. Btw, some tards called me a fascist in real life, too. So what?
My election campaign isn't aimed to recieve understanding from such a contingent. I do hope, however, that most still retain common sense and objectively judge from the facts. Or - at the very least - that they'll keep out of the stuff they know nothing about.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
409
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 01:22:00 -
[12] - Quote
Fianna Illyasfeld wrote:I am wondering about what this CSM candidate thinks about total war, division of territory and the violent expulsion of all the corps who live there?
I'm fine with it as long as it doesn't breach Yulai convention. Or was it the Hague one?.. These system names are so hard to remember!  I8dog (or w/e) is inimitable in this regard.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
416
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 08:57:00 -
[13] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Fon, your campaign seems based on a relatively small subset of issues. Unless you plan on speaking only on these issues at the CSM, I suggest you expand your campaign message.
I think it's just the reverse - I've already outlined quite a lot of points. And a few more will follow.
I'll surely work on other stuff, whatever arises within CSM, but it's literally impossible to have everything covered in one go. If you have anything specific to ask, please go ahead.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
440
|
Posted - 2012.02.13 21:10:00 -
[14] - Quote
A few words on high-security space:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=780636#post780636
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
454
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 03:11:00 -
[15] - Quote
This will get us far too deeply into history and politics and I've got no idea why that would that a be good idea at the moment or even needed in the first place. I don't see myself filling up holes in someone's education. At least not right here, offtopic won't be tolerated.
We'd better talk about EVE and act accordingly as I'm very sceptial at the idea of CSM being effecient without being focused.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
454
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 03:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
Two step wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:This will get us far too deeply into history and politics and I've got no idea why that would that a be good idea at the moment or even needed in the first place. I don't see myself filling up holes in someone's education. At least not right here, offtopic won't be tolerated. We'd better talk about EVE and act accordingly as I'm very sceptial at the idea of CSM being effecient without being focused. Well, seeing as how much of the job of a CSM delegate is to interact with other people, some of whom are Jewish, and some of whom are other races and religions, your apparent intolerance is pretty important. I don't consider this off topic at all.
What makes you think I'm intolerant and can't interact with other people? That's quite interesting, do elaborate.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
453
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 04:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
Two step wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Two step wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:This will get us far too deeply into history and politics and I've got no idea why that would that a be good idea at the moment or even needed in the first place. I don't see myself filling up holes in someone's education. At least not right here, offtopic won't be tolerated. We'd better talk about EVE and act accordingly as I'm very sceptial at the idea of CSM being effecient without being focused. Well, seeing as how much of the job of a CSM delegate is to interact with other people, some of whom are Jewish, and some of whom are other races and religions, your apparent intolerance is pretty important. I don't consider this off topic at all. What makes you think I'm intolerant and can't interact with other people? That's quite interesting, do elaborate. Uh, the quotes that I linked? In one you make a comment that seems like it is intended to be anti-Semitic, and in the other one you praise David Duke, who was a leader of the ***, a group not exactly known for their tolerance. Both of those topics came up during a balance discussion, which implies to me that you feel they are important, or why would you have mentioned them?
These comments apply for the discussion and should be treated as such.
You, on the other hand, feel it's important to pull in words like intolerance and accuse me of not being able to interact with other people (lol) in hope that it will reduce the number of votes I get. Spaceships really are an important business, right? That's something they use in RL politics to bring down an opponent. Dirty and cheap tricks.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
470
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 20:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:
Your views are wretched.
Who's a mittani once again?
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
470
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 21:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Johnny Marzetti wrote:So can you still run if your likes drop back below 100 before the deadline?
Wow, I've never thought I had that much support from goons.
Thanks for bumps, btw.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
470
|
Posted - 2012.02.14 21:22:00 -
[20] - Quote
TFirish3 wrote:So your platform is based on the nerf bat then? 
My platform is based on justice and appropriateness. If it's a nerf here and there, I'm fine with it. Some stuff is to be boosted. It's always a matter of choosing the shortest path.
\o/ |
|
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
480
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 02:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
I don't need any goon backup to efficiently work within CSM just like I don't need a blob with me while PvPing.
That's something a lot of EVE players can hardly overestimate. Goons may waste their breath as much as they want to, but they are only a minority of the playerbase.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
480
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 03:14:00 -
[22] - Quote
Johnny Marzetti wrote:
Also, are you sure you're not on a "do not fly" list due to being affiliated with Aryan Nations or some other domestic terrorist group?
I'm actually a quite handsome fellow both ingame and IRL. Unlike some, I do have my own views though and sometimes that causes local disputes. So what? No one has ever achieved anything by simply pleasing everyone in an insipid manner. You can't do a **** that way.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
480
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 03:25:00 -
[23] - Quote
Johnny Marzetti wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Johnny Marzetti wrote:
Also, are you sure you're not on a "do not fly" list due to being affiliated with Aryan Nations or some other domestic terrorist group?
I'm actually a quite handsome fellow both ingame and IRL. Unlike some, I do have my own views though and sometimes that causes local disputes. So what? No one has ever achieved anything by simply pleasing everyone in an insipid manner. You can't do a **** that way. So you're saying you're not sure whether you're on a "do not fly" list due to your Aryan Nations affiliation. I think voters should take that into account, given the potential need for you to travel to Iceland.
I've got no idea who they are.
Also, implying I have hard time joining a blob is just laughable.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
486
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 16:51:00 -
[24] - Quote
A few words on cruise missiles have been added.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=780636#post780636
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
486
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 21:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
Grumpy Owly wrote:Posting in the hope for a candidacy view on the following: Bounty Hunting
I fully agree that current implementation hardly makes sense and needs to be changed.
That said, the stuff proposed looks a bit complicated and by definition bounty hunting is derivative of pirating. Pirating isn't that viable as a profession and thus bounty hunting won't be lucrative either.
I guess some are mistaken here by the digits shown as bounty - those were collected for years and should someone claim them, it's unlikely they'll recover any time soon. Someone needs to keep dumping isk into the system and I don't see anyone sane doing it for long
It's worth discussing, though. I might be missing something, too. Have never really thought much about bounty hunting, tbqh.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.15 23:23:00 -
[26] - Quote
Herbatrix wrote:You mentioned about how you want any future supercaps to be more balanced, but what are your views on Titans as they currently stand?
I haven't got any practical feeling of their infamous uber-tracking, so this needs some clarification, but I'm a firm opponent of current portal and EW-immunity. My proposals on cyno will automatically fix the portal, but EW-related stuff needs some debates. For instance, they proposed to give 'em build-in warp core strength of like 30, which is way too much. 5 points for a supercarrier and 10 for Titan is probably OK, but I for one would like to see them dropping that crap altogether, since no one actually prevents you from fitting WCS's.
I personally don't care how Titans perform in blobs against each other, my main concern is that they must be actually vulnerable and thus catchable by pretty much anything. And also their use outside sov-warfare is to be brought in line with demands of the game to retain some fun. Being hot-dropped instantly without any warning and without any chance of survival surely contradicts this idea.
So,
EW invulnerability -> EW resist (at most)
Instantenious power projection -> balanced one (see cyno mechanics part)
There's nothing wrong whatsoever with Titans being jammable by Griffins. And one's ability to ruin their guns with Arbitrators will be very good for the game, too. Given there are stacking penalties, it still would be impossible to render Titans totaly crippled.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:03:00 -
[27] - Quote
Mfume Apocal wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:
What makes you think I'm intolerant and can't interact with other people? That's quite interesting, do elaborate.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=442415#post442415Quote:Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose. Quote:you sir are a racist Fon Revedhort wrote:Whatever.
I've never had an intention of pleasing everyone on the globe, especially if they don't even belong to my race - which is something I suspect for your case.
Fixed for some justice.
Why would I want to please anyone making deliberate and unprovoked insults? Ignoring boors is now treated as inability to communicate? Wow.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:50:00 -
[28] - Quote
Andski wrote:i wouldn't go around calling other posters "boors" when you post racist crap unprompted, hope that helps
Asking a goon to elaborate on where exactly he saw 'racist crap' would be too much, right?
Free bumps help, that's for sure.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 00:54:00 -
[29] - Quote
Andski wrote:I saw what I define as "racist crap," how you wish to paint yourself as a ~racial realist~ or otherwise is irrelevant.
You can define a nun as a streetwalker if you so please, so what? I don't give a crap about your definitions. Get me an aswer or get out.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
Andski wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:I've never had an intention of pleasing everyone on the globe, especially if they don't even belong to my race - which is something I suspect for your case. Fon Revedhort wrote:Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose. good enough?
That must be a special definition of racism. My nun-streetwalker comparison fits pretty well with this scheme.
\o/ |
|
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:07:00 -
[31] - Quote
Mfume Apocal wrote:the point is that you sound crazy as **** when your personal racial views spill over into such threads as "hybrid rebalancing"
i mean wtf, seriously.
People sound crazy as *** when they bring comparisons out of the actual conversation (where they belong to) and start a stupid flame.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:13:00 -
[32] - Quote
So stating that races are different implies there are such things as superiory and inferiority?
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:24:00 -
[33] - Quote
Andski wrote:your question is excessively suggestive, but yes, that is what you imply
Alright, mr. interpreter.
Men and women are different. By your logic, superiority is right there. Who's better?
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 01:54:00 -
[34] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:Andski wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:I've never had an intention of pleasing everyone on the globe, especially if they don't even belong to my race - which is something I suspect for your case. Fon Revedhort wrote:Enough of this communism. People are NOT equal just like human races are NOT equal etc. And there's no need in this artificial equalizing you propose. good enough? there's a common thread with all 'proud racists' they're always pretty much the most defective people around so they gotta find some way, some how, that they're not poor scum that nobody cares about and that they have value - not from their intelligence, wealth, friends, status in society, or any of those other multitude of things they lack - through the only thing they've got left: their race it's pretty sad
You failed to make a point on how being proud of your race is racism and how it's bad. They can be proud of whatever they want, it's not a crime. Not even a reason to keep flaming here while having absolutely nothing to say about EVE itself.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
490
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 02:03:00 -
[35] - Quote
Have a cookie. Then go help Andski, cause he's kinda it trouble.
\o/ |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
498
|
Posted - 2012.02.16 16:23:00 -
[36] - Quote
Herbatrix wrote:Sorry for going offtopic and bringing up an old post, but just noticed.. Quote:
It's right the reverse - autocracy has proved itself to be far superior, that's why they promote democracy so desperatly.
..
Democracy or power of numbers has yet to produce anything of value.
Anyone else find it amusingly ironic that you're here partaking in a democratic election process? 
CCP's being run autocratically, so no contradiction here. Parlament can co-exist with a supreme leader. It's merely a consultative body, just like CSM.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
566
|
Posted - 2012.02.23 17:48:00 -
[37] - Quote
I do hope provokers and trolls won't mind me posting some EVE-related stuff. Thanks.
Low-sec.
CCP states Incursions are awesome. I don't feel like denying that particular thought, but let's just talk about whether running Incursions is in line with other low-sec stuff. You can basically run missions, plexes and anomalies. Also you can mine and kill rats in belts. Add in PI, moon mining, hauling - and that's pretty much it.
The thing is, none of the above requires a fleet of 30-50 people in it. Everything's usually being done in very small groups, sometimes even solo. It's pretty easy for pirates to attack those and thus establish social interaction. Those pirates in turn attract third parties and it all escalates pretty good. Incursions, on the other hand, require quite a lot of people initially and - given there are multiple logistic ships as well - are very unlikely to attract something lesser than a blob, which would seem to be more suited for 0.0 roams. That's a huge contradiction - most activities are aimed for small-scale game play while Incursions require significant numbers .
I'm in no way advocating for Incursions removal, though. What I'm saying is: low-sec space needs more small-scale, casual stuff. Something easily available equally for bored pirates and carebears on their first venture out of high-sec. Something fast, which won't require probing out neither the site nor the ships within it. The latter one is a reason why adding level5 agents to each and every dead-end probably won't cut it, but still I don't see why CCP can't spread out level 5 missions across low-sec. Some areas are just plain deserted. Back in my newbie days there was a reason to go search for those empty pockets - one could mine out there. At the moment low-sec mining is a joke, thus dead-end systems are mostly of no use.
I don't see anything wrong with adding special low-sec missions for pirates (sec status below -5) alone. It sounds reasonable to introduce lesser factions - like EoM - which basically aren't present, but could become a nice alternative to regular navy forces. Give 'em a bit of new content - faction rigs, anyone? - and we'll have it basically done!
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
575
|
Posted - 2012.02.25 05:40:00 -
[38] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Nothing about Command Ships Fon? Somehow I expected that topic to be in your top 5. 
As weird as it may sound, I skipped that part for a reason. CCP has already told us they are doing some mental crunching on these ships and I just don't want to propose anything before listening to them.
There are several appealing ways one can improve Command Ships and it's kind of hard to pick one without knowing the general idea of CCP on this issue. Are they buffed battlecruisers meant for assault? Are they intended to act as force multipliers?
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
576
|
Posted - 2012.02.25 07:32:00 -
[39] - Quote
Should we buff Damage Control then? So that frigates (amongst other ships) become even more viable.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
582
|
Posted - 2012.02.27 15:35:00 -
[40] - Quote
As far as I know mods are available at [email protected] (or w/e). I strongly suggest you mail them directly instead of cluttering this thread.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
593
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 17:54:00 -
[41] - Quote
Thanks, Val, though that very Mach was among my least successful ships and I don't see how any of 15 participants of that fight could have used any specific tactics to bring it down. It was all over in like 60 seconds at most 
Anyhow, you win some, you lose some, so see you around! 
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
596
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 10:02:00 -
[42] - Quote
Jonathan Ferguson wrote:For a guy I've never heard of you make a lot of good points.
Why aren't your videos linked in your intro since many others undoubtedly haven't heard of you either?
Yeah, might be useful. Made a few links.
Kitt JT wrote:
Rook is hardly used? I fly ecm quite often, and i have to say, i fly it a lot more than the falcon. Rook is a great ship, but for some reason people don't understand it. Its a great close range brawler.
Unlike the falcon, the rook is very able to deal decent damage (400 dps), fit a strong tank, a prop mod, and still have room for jamms.
Alright, may be that was a bit of exaggeration, but the point remains. Falcons are seen more often, while it should be right the reverse - a niche cloaky ship versus a general combat-oriented non-cloaked one.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
609
|
Posted - 2012.03.06 01:32:00 -
[43] - Quote
Alright, I've never been a fan of wasting my breath over multiple interviews to get as much coverage as possible etc. Having English as a second language doesn't help either.
So I'd better draw your attention to what I'm doing rather than saying.
Here it is, a new movie of mine.
You can not make a proper judgement without having it seen! 
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
623
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 10:00:00 -
[44] - Quote
Thanks for the post.
Misanth wrote:
6) You did not mention this, and I feel like a stuck tape recorder, posting it everywhere but - cloaks. What is your opinion on them? Fine as is? AFK-cloaking, fuel, submarine, etc? Here's why I ask: I play in null, have no blobs, either alone or I bring a friend vs.. well everyone that is around. In lowsec I would never fit a cloak, but in null, sometimes I stay for extended periods, and I very, very VERY often get camped by dictor blobs on gates, with combat probers in local. The cloak is my bread and butter to be able to survive. And while I'd be happy to purely fly ships with cov ops cloaks, 250 dps x1-2 is not enough to break most ratters. Generally we use 1 cov ops ship with 1 non-cov ops, but cloaked. Defenders have everything at their disposal: local, probers, numbers, intel, stations, POS/infrastructure, jumpbridges, dscan, etc. Our only real edge, now that nano days are gone (and consider we stick around) is cloaks. Our targets generally die to igno- or arrogance. If we try log we get combat probed and die while offline, so many times, we are forced to 'sit out' hostiles, occationally for days. We don't mind, but considering all negatives already with the cloaks (lock time, sensor strength, -1 high, visible when warping/logging/moving etc), all potential changes from the AFK-cloak whiners will unfortunately completely break the game for us. Thoughts?
All in all I barely see much negatives at all with your candidacy, bar the Rapier (especially) and Arazu range nerf wishes.
I'll start with Rapier/Arazu. It's desirable to reduce their range bonuses instead of removing them altogether, which is something I didn't really propose in the first place. Even with half a bonus their web/scram range will still be insane or at least will provide them an edge in this regard.
As for cloaking mechanics - that's a very tough call. You stated valid arguments. On top of that, cloaks are the reason why I, for instance, literally hate w-space PvP - there's just no way to figure out whether something is there.
Instead - yet again, merely an idea - how about cloaking providing just a "physical" cover, leaving the others an intel that something is hiding in the grid, the vicinity or even the system?
Also, I'm pretty sure the entire cloaking problem is closely tied up with local chat. Which in turn is said to be addressed. So I'd rather wait and see how they gonna change it. And then we'll adjust accordingly, both in terms of tactics and opinions on further required steps.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
633
|
Posted - 2012.03.07 23:51:00 -
[45] - Quote
Yeah. I don't think that it's NH alone that needs some general buff (other than evident PG issue). The whole CS class is lacking and as I wrote somewhere in this thread I'd rather wait and see what CCP are going to do before making any suggestions.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
633
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 00:40:00 -
[46] - Quote
LXTC-S Predator wrote:Cant underline enough that even though Revedhorts claims and ideas are nice, but after watching his videos i have to say my vote is NOT going to someone who with his music choice.
Omg, that's clearly a pharisee attack here, huh
Did you like my movies, btw?
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
633
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 01:02:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nice work there at producing a bunch of perversions and personal attacks.
Pharisees stopped to be worth having a discussion with eons ago, back in the ancient world.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
636
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 13:47:00 -
[48] - Quote
Kalea Cha-Ching wrote:Shiroi Okami wrote:
Fon's political views, or hell, anything about his personal life IRL are not our concern. He's running for CSM, not the Kremlin. As long as his head is in the game that's all we need to know.
Because he is running for CSM, his political views are very important. THIS IS OF OUR CONCERN! If you vote for him, even if his eve topics are good, you supporting him also in rl with his views and opinions. I can never give such a person my vote. Never.
Don't vote for me then. There's no need in making declarations on you never voting someone left and right, don't fool yourself by thinking your opinion is that important to public.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
635
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 13:57:00 -
[49] - Quote
By all means, do it.
The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about - Oscar Wilde
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
635
|
Posted - 2012.03.08 19:16:00 -
[50] - Quote
Shiroi Okami wrote: *snip*
2) Shield recharge being boosted along with buffer is an issue, too. I agree. As for not making tanking types similar in terms of penalties, I'd say it's possible to make shield tanking have more impact on agility rather than speed, and vice versa for armor. Or something. Also, as said, I'm fine with introducing other penalties, but they should be of proper significance. I'd say that 10% decrease in speed may be probably comparable with at least 30% increase in signature radius. Just like improving DPS by 10% doesn't even come close to, say, 10% increase in targeting range.
3) Cynoes and dynamic spool-up timers. Yeah, maybe that's indeed a bit complicated, but that's something CCP should tell us. And they can even come up with an entirely different ideas to balance it out. We will see.
4) Post-dominion TEs benefit minmatar more than the others, that's something I'm absolutely sure. There's no need to reduce optimal range bonus and the nature of falloff has nothing to do with it. Because, as said, corresponding implants/rigs all boost optimal and falloff equally - by 3, 5, 15 or 20% either for optimal or for falloff. Should we assume TEs are fine as is, then we'll also have to admit tech2 abmit extension rigs should boost falloff by whopping 40% instead of current 20.
I have little to non experience with frigs, but at higher classes DC is way too good and I, for one, use it all the time. And - that's extremely important - unlike MWD it's a no-brainy module. One drops it in, activates and pretty much forgets about it. While MWD requires a lot of efforts to be utilized for the full benefit.
Maybe it might make sense to reintroduce DC as a real damage controlling module, which can be activated only for a limited amount of time and then require some cooling. I don't know. I just smell things aren't right at the moment.
5) My views on ECM are very flexible actually. The stuff I propose just allows to fix it preserving current ECM mechanics in general. Should they want to overhaul it altogether, I would be fine with that as well. I've got no personal preferences on what exactly they'd need to turn it into, though.
6) Covert tech3 with nullifiers. Just like with titans and portals, I absolutely hate the idea something is balanced 'because only X can use it'. That's bullcrap. I would love to see interdiction nullifiers re-introduced as a MODULE, which surely will make it extremely popular. Then we will see how 'balanced' this crap is. It may even take 2 slots to fit such a module, it may have some penalties - I don't care. Just let other ships use it, too - and you'll quickly receive objective statistics.
10) low-sec priority over other things. As I state at http://match.eve-csm.com, fixing low-sec is one of the most pressing issues EVE faces today.
Blobbing should be discouraged somehow, that's for sure. Unfortunately, I don't have any straight ideas on how that can be done within current mechanics, where guns have no dispersion for their shells, where line of fire is non-existent and where it's possible to shoot missiles right through asteroids. This leaves us with AoE weapons and some minor tweaks as possible ways of discouraging blobbing.
Tech3 ships are overpowered in general and it's particularly evident in case of gang-boosting setups. After I got a Loki, I used my old Claymore may be once or twice, when I had to grab a ship to go PvP quickly and Lokies were not available.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
|
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
661
|
Posted - 2012.03.23 23:02:00 -
[51] - Quote
Alpheias wrote:Snow Axe wrote:I hope he wins, I heard he's planning to have his inauguration party on top of Stone Mountain! Pray tell how he will deal with all those people out there of different ethnicity, skin color, religion and culture!
You'd better ask some other CSM members (i won't mention their names) how they will deal with someone of diffrenent views.
Oh, wait - they've showed their utter inability. Still, I think CSM members is general are quite cool gents and will be able to remain focused.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
661
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 01:12:00 -
[52] - Quote
Yet another pharisee.
Jesus, this world is really really fubar.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
661
|
Posted - 2012.03.24 01:28:00 -
[53] - Quote
Alpheias wrote:Fon Revedhort wrote:Jesus, this world is really really fubar. Funny that you should say that, considering that brown shirts like you hate people with different skin color, different beliefs and from different cultures for all kinds of wrong and illogical reasons.
You have no clue what you're talking about. Long story short, you're a plain liar.
I've always 'enjoyed' how you pharisees understand things like freedom of speech - somehow you suppose that people are allowed to express things that you personally have approval of.
Also, not voting for me because of not sharing my views (you know nothing of them to begin with, but still) is like discarding a cook on grounds of him being a communist.
You're a perfect sample of how democracy is a crappy idea and will hardly ever work, since there are always easily manipulated men around, who mess it all and discard related stuff to make their pick based something on unrelated instead.
Fon Revedhort for CSM 7 |
|
|
| |
|