Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
|
CCP Wrangler
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:06:00 -
[1]
We're back for the monthly Live Dev blog and this time it's all about Game design. We will have pretty much the whole Game design department here answering your questions, and as usual Mindstar will join us and help us out. By the time we have this blog the Boost patch will already be deployed!
This will all take place in the "Live Dev Blog" in game channel this Thursday, 13 March, from 20:00 to 21:00 GMT. To participate you'll need EVE Voice active and then join the in game channel and join audio. A recording of the Live Dev Blog will be made available at a later date.
Please remember that the topic is Game design, other questions may not be answered.
Post your questions here!
Wrangler Community Manager CCP Games, EVE Online Email / Netfang
Hug-A-Wrangler! FanFest 2008
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it." |
|
Sylthi
Minmatar Coreward Pan-Galactic
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:09:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Sylthi on 10/03/2008 14:19:08 So, when will it be part of "Game Design" to have the patch notes up more than 12 hours before patch DT?
Seriously though, whats the latest on Ambulation? The thread here and the written blog here seem kinda way out of date. And, we haven't heard anything on it from the devs in a few months.... or at least I haven't. So, how about some official latest on that?
Cheers.
*
* |
Montaire
Genbuku. Daisho Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:22:00 -
[3]
Im getting my mining questions ready...
|
raWill
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:42:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Sylthi Edited by: Sylthi on 10/03/2008 14:19:08 So, when will it be part of "Game Design" to have the patch notes up more than 12 hours before patch DT?
Agreed.
|
Jameroz
Art of War
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:45:00 -
[5]
This will be very intresting. Design team always has the most intresting stuff.
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:02:00 -
[6]
aaaaaassaaaaaault friiiiigs~~~~~
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! |
Katana Seiko
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:03:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Katana Seiko on 10/03/2008 15:06:06 +Will we see AntiAlias-Options in the game soonÖ? Such an option can enhance the graphics quite good. Up to now you have to tweak the drivers to enhance the graphic beauty of the game (and I have to say that EVE on SuperSampling 16xS is just gorgeous!)...
+Is it true that you are working on Premium Models for the Jovian ships?
+When will not simply pop out of existence anymore? It would certainly enhance game play experience (and mining experience) if they would crumble away when they are depleted... --- This is your Captain speaking. Thank you for flying with our spaceline. Please remain seated until the ship has completely burned out. Thank you. |
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:06:00 -
[8]
Topics this blog is not about: Ambulation and patch deployments and procedures, marketing, programming... Pretty much anything that isn't game design area :)
What it is about is pretty much everything else; mining, missions, exploration, PVP, market, manufacturing (man, that's a lot of M-topics), balancing, ships, life, the universe and everything.
We also have a list of some topics that we want to discuss and pitch to the community and some future visions that the game design team has. So settle in and grab a drink, it's gonna be fun.
|
|
Monkey nut
Minmatar The Fallen Gingerbread Men Evolution Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:07:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Monkey nut on 10/03/2008 15:13:49 What changes/enhancements are being considered to the mining interface/process to help it become less 'macroable' (ie less repeative and predictable?
If your willing to endulge me with a second questions......... If you had to name one thing what would you consider to be 'The next big thing in industry'?
EDIT: thought of a second question :P
Thanks --------------------------------- Monkey Nut Helping noobs since 2005
|
Waxau
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:16:00 -
[10]
Black ops are currently role-less. Anything that they can do can either be done with cheaper, faster, more effective ships, bar from jump portals and cynos. And even then, their effectiveness doesnt warrant their use. Are there any plans to alter them? Suggestions so far have been decrease the fuel useage hugely (increasing cargo bay would increase hauling possibilities), or introduce a fuel bay.
Issues so far with them are:
1. Jump range/Jump Bridge range is too small for effective use. In scenarios where you require stealth and cunning, chances are you'll be detected by the time you're in range of your target system, and so all stealth and covert nature is lost.
2. The Widow in particular has all of its attributes against its role. Long long time, small ECM range, coupled with a high price. Any ECM boat tends to be primary, and having a 600 mil ship in close quarters (50km) tends to be rather suicidal.
3. Many consider they would benefit from covert ops cloaks, but ofcourse would have many overpowered tendancies. Are there any ways you can see around this? Or wishful thinking?
|
|
Helison
Gallente Times of Ancar Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:40:00 -
[11]
*) Exploration: What is planned for exploration for the next expansions? The scan-duration for most stuff is too long (not everybody can play 4+ hours per day) and the isk/hour ratio is quite bad for some exploration content. There are several threads around with improvements to the system - from complete rewrites to small changes.
more will follow....
|
Rodj Blake
Amarr PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:44:00 -
[12]
I'd like more information on faction warfare.
Dulce et decorum est pro imperium mori.
|
Mianna Foreseer
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:45:00 -
[13]
Is there any hope that exploration would become more realistic and interesting in the future? Currently exploration is mainly like this. You found stuff that you need to shoot down and loot the goodies.
Where are mysterious ghost ships? Where are abandoned space stations? Strange artefacts? If human have travel in EVE universe for thousands of years there is pretty much REALLY interesting stuff that you could found floating in space that have forgotten history behind of them.
Why there are no black markets or other NPC space encounters what you can find and after you have found them it give other possibilities to interact them than shooting them to space debris. Like Black market hubs were you could have a chance to buy equipments or other information for money? You could acquire pirate hideout coordinationÆs? Buy maps that have known merchant trade routes? Illegal modified rigs, drones or ship designs?
Simple encounter like you find a ship that have lose its warp engine and it would require you help and its up to player to choose what he demand for its help or will he just shoot down the helpless ship is something you never encounter in EVE.
|
Jesho
Minmatar KDM Corp Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:51:00 -
[14]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark life, the universe and everything.
42
|
Threv Echandari
Caldari Dragons Of Redemption Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:51:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Threv Echandari on 10/03/2008 15:51:51 Things that need luvin'
Assault Frigs-- What is their Role now? or "Whats a Hawk Good for anyway?"
Stealth Bombers-- Ok Realy the Bombs.. Still too Expensive adjust mineral costs so the price them more along the lines of Faction ammo if not why not?
Black ops-- See post above.
And my Personal favorite-- The UI. Can we get some more Keboard shortcuts like for Selecting Targets (Friend/Enemy/Closest) etc etc?
Happiness is a Wet Pod
|
Yoinx
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:52:00 -
[16]
I have some pretty minor issues... However, I figured I'd post them anyway.
-When (if ever) will we start seeing shortcuts for things in hangars? For instance. I would like to see a shortcut to open the sell window for a selected item or open a repair item on the selected item.
-Is there any chance to ever have a bulk sell option. I (like most carebears) would love to be able to just select a bunch of loot, and choose sell to have it all automatically sell to the highest buy orders.
-Why is there no 'repair all' option in the first screen of the repair service window. It would be nice to have one there to just go ahead an repair anything that is yours in that station.
-Will Drones that are placed in a drone bay ever show updated stats as affected by your skills and ship bonus like ammunition does once it gets loaded?
BTW. Thanks for fixing the smartbomb sizes.
- I wish I had something witty to put in a signature. - |
Zarch AlDain
Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:52:00 -
[17]
Got a load of questions for you...hopefully you will have time to answer them all :)
Invention is working reasonably well now but there is still the matter of the broken implant (which people payed hundreds of millions of isk for) that hasn't been sorted out. What are the plans for that implant?
The ME and PE of the input BPC to invention has no effect at all on that of the output BPO. Has any consideration been given to letting it modify the output? Even if you divided it by 10 and added it to the -4 base then that would help a lot and would reward the people prepared to put the time into upgrading their BPOs. This would also help reduce the cost of tech 2 battleships to the point where people are more likely to use them. BPO holders will still have an advantage due to the lack of invention costs.
Will the ideas Oveur talked about last year with it being possible to research BPCs as well as BPOs and increase the number of runs/ME/PE ever appear?
I see assault frigates have already been mentioned. What did you think about the idea of bonuses to afterburners and web resistance that was in the AF thread on the forums?
Things have been quiet since the carrier blog followed by Hactors crashed the price of motherships. Can we get an update on the plan for carriers and in particular for supercaps. A lot of mothership builders have lost tens of billions and are sat on ships and blueprints that you can't even get NPC price for.
Given that shields are less used for pvp than armour why was it seen as a good idea to reduce shields when reducing armour resistances?
Will NPC EM resistance be reduced as well or just player resists?
That's it for now, I'm sure I will think of more later tho!
Zarch AlDain ---- My corp is recruiting. See the recruitment thread here.
|
s73v3n2k
Caldari UK Corp
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:03:00 -
[18]
Jump freighters
This weeks patch see's and improvement in these new ships but there is pages and pages of negative feedback in the comments section of the changes blog which that would indicate maybe its not enough.
Jump freighters currently use 3 times more fuel than any other jump capable capital ship in game however other T1 capital ships not designed for logistics do a more efficient jump than it. Do you see the inbalance ?
People don't want to use them with gangs when doing logistics. surely trailing a gang behind a JF slows the logistcis process down alot and is the reason people wanted jump freighters in the first place.
Gangs = normal freighter usage
Insurance payout is 1.2bil (max insurance) for a 5-6bil ship ?
Can we have EW emunity like motherships because its stupid a frigate with a scambler can hold 5-6bils worth of ship without a JF being able to do anything about it. Aleast the imunity will give it a chance to jump away before reinforcements arrive.
POS's
Do you think people should be able to use fighters to kill off pos modules ? Its become a common tactic for people to assign fighters to small ships which a pos can't hit. Those ships warp to the pos and put the fighters on the pos modules then warp away and leave them to kill the modules while they stay out of harms way. Should this be a valid tactic ? especially when a pos won't shoot at fighters unless someone with the starbase defence skill is targeting them and even then small turrets don't dmg them much.
POS's seem to be unable to defend themselves very well without some sort of human intervention i.e. pilots with starbase defence maning the turrets. This creates a massive problem for defending alliances when the attacking alliances is most active in a different time zone - will we see any changes to pos defences soon ?
|
PsychoBitch
Playboy Enterprises Dark Taboo
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:14:00 -
[19]
When can we expect ambulation? What will be able to do? Boxing matches?
Psycho***** Chnnl: PLAYBOY
|
Jonus Rath
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:21:00 -
[20]
- Are there any plans on a major sound effects overhaul & engine update?
|
|
Orakkus
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:23:00 -
[21]
My questions:
Assault Frigates: I know you are currently looking at them, and that you are aware that they have no role, so I am curious regarding what the current thoughts are as to their purpose?
Minmatar Ship Development: The Amarr players have been putting this up for a while, so I understand if Minmatar love is still in the works, but what plans are there to improve ships like the Vargur and the Muninn, as well as classic ships like the Tempest to be more in-line with other races' ships? And if there is a boost, will it be based on a ship by ship improvement, or something more sweeping like upgrading of Artillery Weapons or greater manuverability(sp?)?
UI : One nice thing about some of the MMOs I've played is that the UI can be customized dramatically by 3rd parties. Is that something that is also on the slate?
Thank you again for your time in this, and I appreciate all the hard work you at CCP have done to make EVE a great game!
|
Frothgar
Caldari coracao ardente Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:26:00 -
[22]
One of the topics that has come up a number of times is trying to encourage populations to move into lowsec and 0.0 space. Part of the issue seems to be perceived lack of security for too little perceived reward.
With the long awaited implementation of faction warfare, will alliances be allowed to seed agents for their declared faction in outposts that they have built?
What ideas are being mulled around to try to encourage players to migrate to low or null sec space?
|
Tokena
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:29:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Tokena on 10/03/2008 16:34:39 Speed Tanks
Do you consider the current state of speed tanking and using speed to choose your battles to be fine?
If yes, is it your intention that the vast majority of roaming gangs should use nano fits (nanofibers, overdrives, polycarbs) exclusively?
If no, what changes are you considering to make speed fits less of an "I can never lose" button?
Cloaking
Are there any plans to make AFK cloakes less of a nuisance? Shouldn't an alliance "owning" a part of space should have some means to hunt down pirates (enemies, whatever)? Currently being cloaked is 100% safe...
EDIT: Added cloaking question.
|
Bo Kantrel
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:36:00 -
[24]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark Topics this blog is not about: Ambulation and patch deployments and procedures, marketing, programming... Pretty much anything that isn't game design area :)
What it is about is pretty much everything else; mining, missions, exploration, PVP, market, manufacturing (man, that's a lot of M-topics), balancing, ships, life, the universe and everything.
We also have a list of some topics that we want to discuss and pitch to the community and some future visions that the game design team has. So settle in and grab a drink, it's gonna be fun.
Mining : Forthcoming DEV thoughts from the thread of suggestions such as new ores, comets, etc? http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=692521
Missions : Any new types of missions upcoming? Some level 5's moved to empire? Other types of level 5's besides command? Level 6?
Exploration : Any enhancements such as as the Sisters Of Eve probes and launchers upcoming? Expedition enhancements?
Invention : Any ETA on the invention implants? Can the DEV's show the numbers on how skills affect the outcome?
Ships : Salvaging ship(s) with tractor beam bonus? Exploration cruiser(s)? Any DEV discussion on the "Orca"?
|
Takeshi Yamato
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:36:00 -
[25]
- Will Ambulation actually change or add to the gameplay or just exist for the immersion factor?
- What are the main differences between factional warfare and simply being in a corporation that is at war with another?
- Do you plan on making lowsec more profitable or accessible in general?
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:49:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Ishina Fel on 10/03/2008 16:51:18 Before posting questions here, I advise everyone go to This EVE-TV Page, and on the flash player, choose the "Extras" tab. You can watch several interviews there, in which many questions - for example the balance of speed, or assault frigates - are addressed by game designers.
In response to these interviews, by the way, I'd like to throw in these few comments:
-A hard-hitting fleet focused tech 2 tier 3 battleship class, or "flagships", is briefly mentioned as a future possibility. To specialize ships for fleets, have you considered to focus them on alpha strike? Give the ships a penalty on RoF and a matching damage bonus, therefore maintaining the same DPS but gaining bigger alpha volleys, which are arguably more useful in fleets. But even better: A slower RoF means less calculations for the node CPU, therefore combating lag. (Not that we'll see whole fleets made out of tech2 battleships anyway, but hey... it's the idea that counts.)
-Regarding speed: The whole thing wouldn't be such a mess if polycarbon rigs weren't so ridiculously out of whack in terms on balance. Polycarbon rigs give a significantly higher mass reduction bonus than even tech2 nanofibers; whereas other rigs just about always give less, and in many cases even struggle to give half as much an advantage as basic tech 1 gear (damage/RoF rigs, I'm looking at you). If Polycarbons had their bonus cut back by, say, one third, then you'd have much less crazy speed setups. Please shift the focus back towards having to sacrifice (more) actual module slots.
-Game designers appear to like Heat. And while we're at the subject of rigs: How about a new rig that reduces module damage caused by overheating, and/or one that improves overheating bonuses? That way you could develop specialized setups that excel at using heat for extreme short-term performance, at the cost of long-term sustainability (i.e. the cookie-cutter CCC's).
-Regarding moving level 4 agents to lowsec: obviously not a popular idea with CCP, and in my opinion as well a too drastic move, but how about you moved only the top end ones? Say, all of Quality +16 or higher? Then people would have a choice between doing level 4's in highsec, or doing better level 4's in lowsec.
Further, I'd like our esteemed live bloggers to tell us more about scripts, and how they can be made more sensible and/or more varied.
Bored during Downtime? Why not try Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN! |
Ethaet
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:55:00 -
[27]
-Did you consider with the resistance change that shield tanks are being made even less viable, especially for PVP? Shield tanks already suffer from the use of midslots and terrible cap efficiency, so removing resistances from them reduces their use even further - was this intended?
-Does the resistance change make EMP projectile ammo (kinetic, explosive and EM damage) overpowered? This change increases the damage it does to both shields and armour, giving it a much higher effective dps
-Will we ever see extended downtime during other hours (e.g. starting around midnight rather than midday), so as not to affect players in the same timezones every time?
|
Maaku
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 16:57:00 -
[28]
Are there any plans to add a capability to see what's outside a station before undocking from it? In parallel with this, are there any plans to inhibit a pilot's ability to undock and redock without becoming vulnerable to attack?
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 17:03:00 -
[29]
CCP, one of your lead designer stated, long ago, that MWD were for approaching the enemy, or running, and afterburners were for speed-tanking. What are you going to do with the current nano proliferation? ------------------------------------------
|
Tokena
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 17:13:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ishina Fel Edited by: Ishina Fel on 10/03/2008 16:51:18 Before posting questions here, I advise everyone go to This EVE-TV Page, and on the flash player, choose the "Extras" tab. You can watch several interviews there, in which many questions - for example the balance of speed, or assault frigates - are addressed by game designers.
Well, I was kinda hoping for something a bit more substantial than those interviews. And the fact that these questions come up again and again suggest that many people want answers, doesn't it? :)
So, give us a more up to date answer to speed, cloaking and pos warfare. Pretty please?
|
|
Kenji Noguchi
Omerta Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 17:16:00 -
[31]
In the " life, the universe and everything" area, are there any plans to make possible political parties or associations for pilots? (for a more exact description of what I'm talking about, please see This forum thread). It something that made sense before, but with the incoming CSM implementation, it's something that's almost a logical step.
------------------------------------- Kenji Noguchi, Caldari State warrior. APEX Unlimited Security Division. |
Kolten
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 17:49:00 -
[32]
How will the random undock points affect the safety of the pod pilot when undocking in lowsec and/or nullsec? Taking lag into consideration, will undocking at a 0-15 degree angle at full burn possibly have the effect that the pod pilot will be out of undock range by the time the client UI loads?
|
Phryne Tsume
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 17:55:00 -
[33]
Please consider fixing the apparent bug in which faction crystals get damaged just as fast as Tech 2 crystals.
|
Aleisha Liao
Caldari Wild Card Squadron Brotherhood Of Steel
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 18:02:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Mianna Foreseer
Is there any hope that exploration would become more realistic and interesting in the future? Currently exploration is mainly like this. You found stuff that you need to shoot down and loot the goodies.
I believe that escalation missions are too few now, and we need a lot more, with very different and varied endings. But more than that, there needs to be a singular outside "Oh ****" event, something that shakes up both exploration and PvE at once, all across the EVE universe. Like finding an intact Yan Jung base in Querious, where it has no business being, with living inhabitants in cryosleep, thus waking them up, or finding a Sleeper ship still enroute to its destination. Maybe even running into an isolated group of Takmahl colonies, or something even more dramatic, like a Terran incursion with an artificial exploratory wormhole.
|
Katrina Bekers
Gallente Sudo Magodo Corp
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 18:17:00 -
[35]
Any design decision in the pipe wrt denying insurance payout for the ships killed by Concord?
A clause along the lines of "if one branch of our very organization booms you, we won't pay the insurance" would make a lot of sense. -- Kate |
Sharoom
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 18:20:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Sharoom on 10/03/2008 18:23:47 Nearly all my questions have to do with built in time-sinks in EVE. I understand the need for them, but some seem excessive or un-needed.
A. Autopilot - Why does it stop so far out from the gate as opposed to warping to 0 meters, and then jumping? Instead (even in 1.0 sec's) you are stuck with several minutes of wait time each gate. This one 'issue' means one is forced to pay attention to what is otherwise a very tedious task.
B. The use of certain timers - such as swapping between ships. Why a wait time on that? Some are reasonable, such as launching from somewhere - the timer ensures you can't probe to see if people are waiting outside for you. Others make no sense at all - such as the swapping between ships.
C. Insufficient Power to make this warp. I don't see the point for this at all, other than a vague attempt at realism. The only ingame value I can see from it is if I'm in a small ship, it drops me out of warp before the gate, which means that if someone is chasing me (and not using warp disrupting missiles, or having killed me when I first arrived) I am in the middle of no where and for all intents and purposes unfindable. Beyond that, this combined the autopilot issue means that either way I'm going to take an extended amount of time to travel on a time that is already immensely large without the use of an effective auto-pilot to navigate me around it. So the question, what is the purpose/why was this implemented as it is?
As for a non-time sink question; Regarding the use of one person as a hauler and one person as a miner. This seems rather common, however as my friend put it, it relies on a lot of trust between the partners. While the use of people in-corp etc can be fine, any thoughts towards an implementation of some sort contract or otherwise for this sort of activity? Thanks.
|
Dazzstorm
Minmatar Blake Industries Collective Asylum
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:00:00 -
[37]
I would like to see less repetitiveness on missions and to have more interesting situations pop up, EG hacking areas. Ghost ships being salvageable, capital parts maybe? a few more rarer roids showing up, time limits for missions so there is more of a chance to fail them .
My 2 isk
|
Belmarduk
de Prieure
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:08:00 -
[38]
Skill Training - Queue or Dual training
This could enable players to either queue skills so that when one level finishes the next level in that skill starts training automatically, or another preset skill starts training automatically. Dual training would enable you to have a primary long-term skill in training with a secondary short-term skill sharing the training time. After a level in the secondary skill has trained, the primary skill trains at full speed again.
ETA when this will ever be implemented ??????? CCP Please give us casual players a Skill-Queue !
|
A Sinner
Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:16:00 -
[39]
Hello. I have a few questions for you. 1. I know there are some stations in eve which let you see more landing pads when docked besides your own. Is it possible in the near feature to also see the other guests of the station in their ships landing on those pads ? 2. Is there anything going to be done about the t1 gallente ships, which all have the same colour ? I am talking of course about the cyan colour used for all the t1 gallente ships. The myrmidon and thorax were looking better before in my opinion, colour wise of course. 3. Are you thinking of adding a queue to the training system ? 4. Are there going to be any changes made with the sound of EVE soon ? I find it ok right now, but I feel there can be some improvements made, especially for the turrets. Also I think it would be nice to hear a sound when a ship close to you enters or exits warp. I would also suggest taking the espionage part of eve a little further by giving people the ability to intercept conversations through EVE Voice. Of course this has to be something very hard to accomplish if it will ever be implemented, like adding lots of frequencies and extensive training time. It would be very real life like imo.
That's about it for now, Thanks in advance, Alex ----------------------- "There are no ugly women, just men who didn't have enough to drink" |
SATAN
BURN EDEN
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:16:00 -
[40]
1) Boost patch, what happened to actually boosting the things you nerfed too much? IE. Recon ships using damps, damps in general, Motherships, etc...
2) Speed, why is it acceptable to have ships that are completely immune to any form of damage as long as they stay 4k+. If it is your plan to let everyone run around doing 10k/sec, then perhaps you should also give people that spent a lot of time training for other things a way to counter them? You nerfed plenty of ships that have been considered over powered in the past, and to be honest they were no where near as over powered as a Vega doing 15k/sec, or a Mach doing 20k/sec. 2a) Maybe a good alternative would be to get rid of the explosion velocity attribute of missiles, or at the very least increase missile explosion velocity by 2x. And at the same time increase tracking for turret ships so they can hit these ships. 2c) Why not give a negative penalty for speed tanked ships, that would make their speed be a penalty as well. For instance increasing damage taken by an exponential number the faster they go.
3) Motherships, what is the point of these ships? They are pointless at this stage, and the chars stuck in them might as well be deactivated. Can you at the very least make them dockable so that we can use the chars to fly ships that actually have a purpose. at the very least give them a massive tank/damage boost so that they can actually defend them selves from heavy dictors than can passively tank then 23/7.
4) Jump portals, far as I see it they are the biggest problem in EvE at the moment. They reduce traffic to nearly nothing in 0.0 except in choke points into empire. They promote blobbing to the point of silly, alliance always use them as a back up tool for combat ships. Can you add some sort of jumping delay? IE. If one ship jumps there is no delay but if multiple ships try jumping in create some sort of cue to jump using portal. At the same time price for using jump portal should be increased 100x, how do you expect 0.0 to be not safe if you can transverse all of it in 1 jump and then insta into empire? There needs to be a price for such movement, and right now that is no where near high enough.
5) Logistics ships/remote repping, something needs to be done about the ability of logistics and to an extent remote repping in general. You say you want to promote small gang warfare, but you force us to bring 10 ships to kill 1 because it is being repped by 2 logistic ships. How does this make sense?
6) Removal of local, is it reality or just pipe dreams? It is long overdue to give pvp'rs some sort of cookie to counter all the countless penalties you have added through out the years.
|
|
Vitrael
Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:17:00 -
[41]
A question:
There's no doubt that Sovereignty and POS warfare are under review by devs at the moment as indicated in any of several threads relevant to the topic, chiefly:
Cynosural Field Mechanics Sovereignty and Starbases: The Future!
However a lot of players like myself feel out of the loop on what changes are actually being considered. So in some words:
1. What specific features and mechanics of sovereignty and POS can we expect changes to?
2. What, if any, changes in particular are being considered?
3. On what timeframe can we expect to see these changes implemented? Several months? More than a year?
|
Wigdigster
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:22:00 -
[42]
What plans do you have to reduce blobbing in capital ship combat? --> where is capital combat going? (is it getting bigger, smaller, moving towards more utility? etc.)
Would you consider adding a new ship class designed specificaly for capital ship combat, thats not a capital ship.
|
Sexiest Beast
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:23:00 -
[43]
Question : Will there ever be a reward for gaining +10 to your Faction ? Notes : The onset of FW should have a reason to take such hits to your faction standings and encourage the desire to fight for your race. L5 missions. The unfair balance between negative and positive faction standings.
Question : Will new faction ships be released Notes : With the development of Recons, Destroyers, Battlecruisers, Commands, Exhumers, Freighters, Capitals . . and many more. will the big 4 factions step up their game and have/release Fleet/Navy varieties of the more upto date flavours. this could add to the LP store and also FW etc etc.
Question/Statement : Loyalty Points should be exactly that. i understand the need to create a sink of sorts with tags and items but loyalty should be rewarded. If you have to pay for it . . its not a reward. The LP store has been crying out for improvent and even yourselves have stated that a new improved LP store is on its way. Will this be implemented anytime soon ?
|
aiiaiiaii
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 19:48:00 -
[44]
There are currently around 25 titans in game.
If we assume that the current proliferation not only continues but increases, it's reasonable to think we may in the near future see twenty titans operating in the same timezone and all belonging to the same allied block. If they were than further deployed at a faction fit cyno jammer (as they were able to jump in to the system via jump bridge) what kind of non-capital fleet is expected to reasonably be able to attack the cyno jammer? My own answer is that having double digit amounts of titans operating under a cyno jammer is the equivelant of defensive invincibility with the current mechanics available.
|
Tiberius Nazamir
The International Brotherhood of Asian Descent
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 20:08:00 -
[45]
I'm in favor of the Local Channel being removed, has anyone considered adding a new skill set for Communications? Perhaps one skill that increases the range in jumps that your character can communicate with other ships. This would also effectively nerf the Corp and Alliance channels, as you might be able to receive a communication from someone with "Galactic Communications V", but not be able to send a reply with your "Galactic Communications II". This would also open up a doorway for training Comm skills that would let you, combining with Hacking skills, slice your way into another Corporation's Chat Channel. This skill could also combat Alliances occupying huge areas of space, forcing them to pull back, so that their ships can stay in comm range of each other. You could begin with the ability to communicate with anyone within your solar system or an adjacent system, then each level would add 5 jumps to the radius. Some ships (Logistics, Fleet Command and Covert Ops types, probably) might have a bonus on this range and a new Leadership skill might boost a Fleet's range, allowing for a large, multi-wing attack to communicate with each other. Signal Booster modules could also enhance the range, or signal beacons dropped by means of a Scan Probe Launcher. There are a lot of directions that Communications could take the game.
Some others have mentioned revising the Skill Training system by adding a Queue, dividing your SP with a Dual Skill system, or removing Learning Skills entirely. What do you plan to do with these ideas? What do you think about the idea of adding a new Learning Skill that would give your character the ability to Actively and Passively Train skills by using them. For example, I might be training to fly a Battleship, but I spend all my time in a Mining Barge getting the ISK to buy it. My "Passive Skill Points" are sent to Battleships, while my character studies how Battleships function. My "Active Skill Points" are going to Mining Barges, Mining and Refining skills relevant to the Ore I'm working, Drone Control, and Trade. Each ship or module would have a Skill Point Cap, where use of the item would stop adding to your points after you'd acquired a certain skill level, which promotes using T2 versions of items for this purpose.
Another way to pull of a similar idea would be to incorporate Experience Points in some way with Missions. After completing a Mission, you would be given a number of Skill Points to assign into skills relevant to the Mission you completed. So, a courier Mission might offer you some Navigation or Industrial Ship type Skill Points, while Combat Missions would offer you a wide variety of options.
Another Game Design idea might be to better employ the environment of space for combat purposes. Adding in modifiers to sensors and weapon effectiveness to account for things like fighting in an Asteroid Field full of a multitude of minerals that could scramble your sensors. Similarly, fighting in a nebula would have its own set of unique difficulties. This could offer you a new avenue with Sensor Related skills. Allow characters to train Transponder Skills to better identify targets, or mask their own Transponder to make it more difficult for people to see the bounty on their head.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tiberius Nazamir THe International Brotherhood of Asian Descent |
Saromaru
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 21:14:00 -
[46]
6) Removal of local, is it reality or just pipe dreams? It is long overdue to give pvp'rs some sort of cookie to counter all the countless penalties you have added through out the years.
i agree to this yet pvprs have had one uncounterable mechanism against newer players... gate camps don't give me that bull about warp stabs... 2 scrambles and any ship is powned before they could even see what was happening pvprs should get comm jammers or lets assume it works like air traffic control and u can turn off you're transponder or removal of local as a whole but having Ewar interference fields around gates now boohoo now people can cruise freely through 0.0 space this is false now youll have more prey lured in by the false sense of security that insta jumps bring but it makes piracy more dynamic and harder to do forcing people to have to be good at it and not lazy enough to sit at a gate XD
|
Pizi
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 21:23:00 -
[47]
A life, the universe and everything Q:
in the light of the absolute successfully AT5 and EVE TV weekend with a new player record
What are the plans and the future of EVE TV weekly show _______________________________________________ Mining Crystal II BPC Pricelist EVEpedia[Deutsch]
|
FuQue
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 21:43:00 -
[48]
- According to the interview on EveTV, 'many options' have been discussed regarding removing local - the main point being that local should be a chat channel, not an intel channel. What about making players visible in local ONLY IF THEY SPEAK IN LOCAL? How is this NOT a good idea?
Cloaking is becoming a real issue for logistical operations. Are there any plans to allow probing of cloaked ships in the future? What form will this take?
POS warfare is completely boring. What is being done to promote the 'fun-ness factor' of POS warfare? Are POS's the best idea for soveirgnty? Why not remove them from SOV altogether and use "active pilots in space" instead? (meaning - the more active pilots in a system/constellation/region, the more SOV points one would get)
|
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium STELLAR LEGION
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:21:00 -
[49]
Hauling missions: they need some sort of overhaul... rewards is unbalanced, u could incorporate deadspaces etc.. any plans to do anything for them?
more variety in mission: more than just go in shoot everything that is the exact same every time go to agent repeat. random generator on what enemies appear or smth pls.
BOOSTERS: I've found it very hard to find any info on these. from what I understand u need to harvest gas reproccess it a few times then take it to an agent in a cosmos area to trade for the high quality ones. Any chance of increasing accessability of bpo's / reactions or creating the bpo's for the high quality ones so we can make them ourselves. Any plans to do anything with them at all?
How do u get a job at game design? Do you guys read the F&I board and game dev board much? I very rarely see any dev posts there.
thx for reading and the good work on eve
ccp pls do something about minmatar ew. target painters suck and mauraders can use both our racial ew |
praznimrak
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:26:00 -
[50]
Ok. Im defenitly for change in local chanel.Only player speaking in local chat shoud be visibel. Another good sugestion is dual skill training.Or posibiliti to program your sequenc of skills to train so when one finish another starts automaticli. Stargate r problem to be solved.A lot of pvp is based on them and to much blobing is resault of stargates.Something have to be changed cose it is becoming practicli imposibel to have fun in 0.0.Jumping out of gate and finding 24/7 blob is anoying. Another thing is that pvp is practicli not rentabel at all.There must be some sistem of isk reward for killing ship in pvp fight.Not everybody is pve orientid,and peopel who have fun in pvp find it hard to scrafice 100 millons isk worth ship to gain nothing from pvp fight.So plese think off this for the future. Idea of skills in comunications and being abel to hack other corp chanel is nice.All RL conflicts belic and corporations ones includ comunications war.So do something abouth it. Thx for listening and apologize for my bad english. Praznimrak
|
|
Foot M
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:28:00 -
[51]
Ok here is a Foot M style brain dump!!!
Resists: If I read the post correctly then shield are losing 10% explosive resists and armor are losing 10% shield resists. surely this is just yet another covert caldari nerf, and yet let me explain. (im gonna sound like an idiot if i missunderstood seriously) =) total base resists on armor are 60+10+25+45 = 140 total base resists on shield are 60+40+20+0 = 120 so armor tankers have a resist advantage of 16.6% a bs with a X-Large II booster can boost 120 shield per second. a bs with a LAR II can rep 71.1 per second. Cap usage are as follows. 1 x X-Large II = 72/sec 1 x LAR II = 35.5/sec we can now show that boost per cap Shield = 120 shield costs 72 cap making, 1 shield = 0.6 cap Armor = 71.1 armor costs 35.5 cap making, 1 armor = 0.499 cap (rounded) taking into account the 16.6% higher base resists of armor we can calculate that the actual cap used per armor unit is Armor = (71.1*1.166)=82.9 costing 35.5 cap making 1 armor = 0.428 which is 40.2% (rounded) better than a shield tanker. obviously most armor tanks fit dual rep and shield tankers fit a SBA II. punching these into the calculations gives the following results. Armor Tanking (dual rep) 142.2rep/sec costing, 0.499 (rounded) cap/per armor unit Shield Tanking (X-Large II + SBA II) 163.2rep/sec costing, 0.453 (rounded) cap/per shield unit again calculating the 16.6% boost to armor base resists... Armor 165.8rep/sec costing, 0.428 cap/per armor unit making armor tanking 5.8% more efficient than shield tanking when sheild tankers use a SBA vs dual rep.
now where was I... ohh yes the covert caldari nerf.. well as you can probably tell, this 5.8-40.2% difference between efficiency between shield and armor tanking has led to a armor tanking trend even on some ships that can shield tank perfectly well. the nerf comes in here 120 - 10 = 110 = 9.1% resist nerf 140 - 10 - 130 = 7.7% resist nerf so armor tanking ships are being given an aditional 1.4% advantage over the already 5.8-40.2% which they have... figures were calculated on a maxed out pilot.
well thanks a lot!
maybe it would be worth giving shield resists some base EM resists or to take away some of the explisive resists on armor....
Quic***k Hit Caldari with the Nerf bat!! it hasnt been done this week yet.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day... |
Foot M
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:30:00 -
[52]
Local: You could make it so only the sov owners of the systems have access to see who is in system, and of course high sec factions & concord would be more than willing to share this info for everyone in 0.5+ thinking about dropping local player lists then in low sec and some 0.0 areas, that gives the hunter (cheap gankers) a better chance of finding a ratting ship and killing him/her. would it not then be prudent to take away the ship scanner which allows an experienced pilot to locate someone who is ratting within seconds and instead force them to either fly arround the belts or use probes (which yes may nerf their dps output) or force them to use more covert ops and make the process of hunting more expensive.
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day... |
Foot M
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:30:00 -
[53]
Sov and Pos Warfare: I havent put a lot of thought into it but wouldnt it make sence that in a sov 4 constellation the capital and pos's/outposts in there are unable to be attacked, but also when you have sov 1 you get fuel bonus, when you have sov 2 you have cpu and pg bonus to pos's and with sov 3 you get resist bonuses. why should it be as easy to assault a system that has been held and fortified by the owners for months as a system that an alliance has just moved into a few days before. maybe with sov 2 and 3 there should be some module that can be anchored that can give out a POS gang bonus as such.. as far as boring pos warfare goes I dont think we are going to see that change till the whole POS concept is changed. ------------- I was discussing it a few months back with some people and kinda came up with the idea that you anchor a central station (offensive tower) at a planet but you are unable to fit anything to it then only the corp/alliance who has a OT at a planet can anchor towers at moons, these towers at the moons can be used for moon mining etc but you cannot anchor defences at them but at the same point they are unable to be attacked while the OT stands, but each tower at a moon gives bonuses to the OT at the planet in terms of Shield HP, CPU, Power Grid and perhaps even force field size. this would then bring planets with large quantitys of moons to be quite valuable (defenseively) and also allow the OT to pack a bigger punch and actually threaten a larger hostile cap fleets. as you all know by now unless a dread trys to kill a pos on its own the pos really has a hard time killing anything bigger than a bs. developing this further the towers at the moons have a very low hp level and no way to be stronted, but the OT can be stronted maybe locally within the OT itself or maybe dependant on the number of moons held on the planet. ofcourse with most systems having 8-10 planets it would reduce the pos bashing boredom both for the support fleets who camp gates all day and for the capitals who have no excitment and falling asleep (yes i have done this). it also means to get 8-10 good strong OT's you may need to have 10 pos's at each planet to support them and that will cost a lot in fuel and cost a lot to setup with the towers, making it hard to fortify every planet in every system you own due to the pure cost, but at the same point allowing you to make your main/home systems something special indeed. im sure there are loads of reasons why this will be shunned but here are a few good points: 1) more risky & exciting pos warfare 2) less time sitting about waiting for others to kill towers that half of the time have no fittings on and are just there to anoy/slow you down. 3) makes it possible for smaller alliances to hold off larger forces if they have the funding. 4) rewards alliance who have held the system for a long time (cpu/pg, shield resists)
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day... |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:44:00 -
[54]
Station Undock Traffic Jams;
Why not rotate Jita 4-4 Navy 180 degree's on its Vertical Axis so the undock point faces towards where 99% of the undockers want to go?
While the change coming in this weeks patch will help with this problem in some regards, I feel that my idea(question) would have been far simplier to implement, have far less mechanic changing ramifications, and would have made a lot of sense from an RP stand point.
--
|
Kel Dario
Amarr Blue Sky Inc
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 23:52:00 -
[55]
My questions is...
1) Will you look at the Blockade Runners and find them a new bonus? I don't know what exactly but agility, signature reduction or simply more speed would be nice. Their current tanking bonus is worthless since if you take fire you are dead anyway if you not got back to gate in time.
1b) The Crane has no grid to fit a mwd, unless you fill your lows for rcu's. It need at least 20+ more grid.
2) Tech 2 armor plates are crap. They cost more, they have to many negatives like more mass and signature over named plates but give nothing better in return. Only a n00b who don't know better fit them because they are "Tech 2".
3) This one has been asked for a lot already and I want to know when we will get it: Klick me Dont be lazy klick on the link please.
4)Will we ever get bounty hunting as a real profession in EVE? As it is now bounties serve no real purpose. Anyone can collect them, that "anyone" is often a friend or an alt who collect the bounty for you when yours are big enough.
Having bounty contracts set by a player on another player should be like killrights are now but transferable to someone who are capable of hunting down and terminating the target for you.
Well that's it for now.
|
TimGascoigne
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 00:19:00 -
[56]
Because of the reduction to the natural armor resistance for EM damage. Do you think there is a chance that people will now harden EM especially with EANM hardeners which could potentially reduce the effect of lasers?
|
coolruningc
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 00:20:00 -
[57]
Edited by: coolruningc on 11/03/2008 00:20:42 sound ui to sound effects on gamer's. Thoes that use sound. I can turn the UI sound effcts but not the sound effects from when a player or rat is hitting me. There for the music off eve is quite and the lser or gun sound is deffing please could you look into a second option for sound effects thanks!
|
TimGascoigne
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 00:26:00 -
[58]
Does CCP Zulupark consider speed tanking to be legitimate/intended aspect of gameplay and does he consider speed tank to have its counter?
Also do you consider the nerfing of speed to be disproportionately effective against minmatar ships as opposed to the other races?
|
InnerDrive
Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 00:51:00 -
[59]
Edited by: InnerDrive on 11/03/2008 00:55:41 Are we ever going to see a overal speednerf? Right now its possible for something like a claymore to reach sustainable speeds of 20k/S or more, claymore being a battlecruiser... same thing with some nanofittings on cruisers.. and ceptors going 30k. Can good mwds and snake implants be made more easely available for non trillionairs? (still looking at nerfing the topspeed on most ships going over 7-8k)
And talking about speed, if your going to balance all dictors to fly the same (current sabre) speed. I for one will quit flying normal dictors completely if you will nerf my sabre even more, its fine like it is right now just boost the other races a bit so they reach about the same speed.
As for cloaking... , its allready pretty limited to what you can do and only very few ships can actualy do some damage and fly around cloaked (force recons), while i admit that having a hostile in your system all day you can do nothing against is anoying, it is part of life in 0.0 and nobody is forcing people to stay in a specific system and its allways possible to use logistic support ships and stuff like that to defend your operations. If it became possible to somehow probe etc people that are cloaked some rich people woud max out skills in that stuff and find you in no time with 3 chars etc.
Region warfare: make objectives at different systems in a constellation to break a sov claim or something like that with a limited timeframe. this woud make people move around more and woud probably result in more little fights all over the region.
Flagships: Battleship sized commandships just dont go over the top on the resists and give them all massive new bonus to gangs that woud make them worth having in your fleet (other bonus than the current commandships are giving). And i think allowing them to overload modules better/much longer and give them a booster(drugs) negative effect reduction might also be something nice to look at for people that want to get into the specialized skills related to them.
Ill end this with saying that it be nice to give us 60 mil+ sp or more pvp pilots something to specialize at that woud still be as usefull as a regular t1 fleet bs dps wise (we been flying those for yearrs now:)) but have all those extras available (that require loads of skills to use) on it that makes it worth to field these ships. Or we can just all get into titans from lack of ships to train for :)
Hope that was not to much and hf talking about any and all these questions :)
|
jongalt
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 00:58:00 -
[60]
what are you doing to make the game more fun to play without indulging in sadism or masochism?
-jg.
|
|
Foot M
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 01:05:00 -
[61]
ohh one thing i did forget to mention... gang bonuses, get a fleet with decent gang bonuses sitting at a gate...armor goes up shield goes up, you boost your shield so its full before the battle. than your told to jump in because the baddies are going to try and run, all armor ships jump in and get the bonuses add with full hp, the shield tankers jump in and gain 10-20% shield but with no HP, even though seconds before you had them.. maybe there should be some sort of buffer so when you jump through a gate it waits till you have decloaked before taking away our precious shields giving time for the squad wing and fleet commanders to jump in...
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- This day is called the feast of Crispian: He that outlives this day... |
Sniser
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 01:12:00 -
[62]
- What more changes are going to be done on Amarr ships? Is there any chance to get rid cap laser turret and give any other nice bonus while reducing 50% cap usage on laser turrets?
- Currently amarr have only two type pulse turrets to chose on each class,except small pulses, example medium pulses have only focused and heavy. Is there any posibility to create another type just in middle of focused and heavy? and for large turret?
- Which are the steps Game Designers use to chose what ship or module need a boost or nerf? Can you explain them?
|
Evil Pookie
BURN EDEN Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 03:54:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Evil Pookie on 11/03/2008 03:56:58 I have put alot of thought into how do we break the blob and came to the conclusion that pos warfare is the single largest contributor to the blob mentality. So my suggestion is to make pos warfare more dynamic. the more dynamic you make pos warfare the more mobile both attacking and defending forces will need to be. ccp already acknowledge this and have reduced the max reinforced time of posses to address this. Whilst a step in the right direction i would reccomend a further tweak.
1) allow dreads to burn through stront timers by continuing to pound a pos after it goes into reinforced mode. This would allow the attacking force to mess with the stront timer, and mean that the defending force would need to form up and defend their posses as they are getting attacked as opposed to waiting until their prime time to amass a blob to defend the pos. I initially thought that removing the reinforced mode was the solution, but i can see how this would not be palatable by most. so the way i see it is the attacking force puts a pos into reinforced mode. the defending force manipulates stront to ensure the pos comes out of reinforced 12 hours later (defenders prime time) and the attacking force continues to attack the pos and slowly burns through the stront bringing the pos out of reinforced mode 4 hours later.
by doing this you will make pos warfare more dynamic. thus breaking up the blob. the blob will break up as there will me more systems under contention at any given time. the more targets to defend, the more the defending forces have to spread themselves out , the less blobage.
|
Badjakstein
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 10:47:00 -
[64]
(sorry for my bad english)
1. Why did you guys put in chanced based/time consumping gameplay?
I understand the combat chance based gameplay for wrecking hits and jammers, even for invention I can understand, but even that is strange.
But I dont understand the chance based gameplay for salvaging or hacking. It is just time consuming and it doesn't increase the gameflow. Why not increase the % of the skills. So you have a succes rate of 100% if you train it to L5. So if you specialize you get more reward for your training time.
For some hacking cans I needed to wait like 30 tries at L4 hacking, it is just time consuming and does not add something to the game.
Also in some mission you got a timer and not a trigger before the next wave spawns. This is also time consuming and adds nothing special to the game.
|
Sal Alo
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 13:33:00 -
[65]
What about doing mining less boring?
You could introduce some "mini-games" that increase lasers yeld, for example when you active a mining laser on asteroid, you can see the asteroid in a frame and from there you can click some more "profitable" points on it.
Other question is missions. They are boring and I can't see the #484414914 OMZFG!!!!11111oneoneoneeleven CCP is claiming about the total amount of missions in EvE. I get just the same 5, continuously (even changing agent and faction).
What about designing minmatar ships BEFORE than others? It appears like our bonus are the "uhm caldari got this, gallente got that, amarr lolz, and minmatar what is left". Specially in PvE, our ships are sub-par at best, requiring millions of skills (most skill intensive race) for being sub-par and yes Vargur sux, while other races got fabulous marauders (powergrid and you know the various problem)
|
Sky Marshal
Aeden Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 15:02:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 11/03/2008 15:05:31
I hope one day that CCP add a filter to automaticaly delete all "Remove Local" posts, as a majority of players don't want remove it.
I have only two questions :
- 1) The boost patch will indirectly boost Matar players against all players, specialy shield tankers one, in an actual situation where CCP admit that Armor is more used than Shield, and reduce a new time the interest of shield tank. Will CCP do something to try to balance shield against armor ? (Passive regen don't compensate and it is really efficient on few ships only).
- 2) The undock modification invert the balance between campers and stuck players who can't know the situation outside of the station, and will probably reduce undocking process in general. Will CCP create something to be able to know what happens outside ? (Ask someone of your corp/alliance is not an option most of the time) _______
16/20 Dragon : ½ Great Game + 14/20 Revelations : ½ Desyncs... + 11/20 Trinity : ½ BBSOD, Bugs, Desyncs, F*** Nerfs + 10/20 v1.1 : ½ [...] + EXP shield nerf +
CCP, you are tiring. |
Julius Romanus
Blood Corsair's Blood Blind
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 16:02:00 -
[67]
Previously the Omen had little to no possibility of fitting 4x FMPII's, a mwd, and a tank that could be called more than marginal. With the addition of another turret hard point, without the inclusion of a grid/cpu boost, you've left the Omen still a marginal to worthless ship.
Many threads end up on the top page regarding the pilgrim lately. Do you feel this ship is performing well enough as is? If not, do you intend to tweak its current capabilities to give it something nearing survivability in web range. Or instead revamping the ship with a range bonus.
Do you feel the Gallente recons are also working as intended? Do you still feel this way when contrasting the pilgrim/gal recons with say, the falcon?
RECON BALANCE someone bring it up please, I will be at work for the blog.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 18:17:00 -
[68]
Local - when will this stop being an intel tool? Provide a filter to be displayed in Local based on standings and corp/alliance. By default Local should only show those who type in Local.
Travel - is CCP considering revising the interstellar travel system to allow for some dynamic tactical options as opposed to current static gate camps? This wouldn't have to change the current star-map topology, just add more entry/exit points for every solar system along the current stargate routes, and give every ship a basic jumpdrive. As a bonus, the complexity of such a travel system makes it infinitely easier to ballance than stargates.
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 18:28:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Sky Marshal I hope one day that CCP add a filter to automaticaly delete all "Remove Local" posts, as a majority of players don't want remove it.
I hope that one day CCP adds a filter to automatically delete all posts claming to express the wants and desires of the majority of EVE players. ...
|
Sosik
Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 23:17:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Sosik on 11/03/2008 23:18:28 Question:
Heavy interdictors are not well balanced in terms of their tanking ability. The more popular passive shield tanking onyx and broadsword are relatively cap-neutral and can field both a large hitpoint buffer and a high DPS tank. The armour tanking heavy interdictors cannot field all these critical advantages. As such, are there any plans for balancing the heavy interdictor tanks?
|
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:28:00 -
[71]
Some pirate items have fallen by the wayside due to changing game mechanics. This has made the LP stores for these factions less robust and not very rewarding. Off the top of my head I can cite the Halo sets, which sell for the exact same price on the market as the agent asks for, and the Talisman sets, which sell for nearly this same price since the nosferatu nerf. Many other pirate items sell for much less than 1,000 ISK per LP, which (AFAIK) has been a standard measure among mission runners for whether a store item is worth buying or not.
Considering the market values and relative uselessness of some of these items, do you think they are due for rebalancing?
|
Feng Schui
Minmatar Ghost Festival
|
Posted - 2008.03.12 00:29:00 -
[72]
1) Why wasn't the Amarr Recon and Gallente Recon ewar bonuses looked at in this patch?
2) Why wasn't the core of any of the Amarr problems looked at with this patch? (powergrid issues, cap issues)
3) Why wasn't the Amarr Recons looked at generally, or why hasn't anyone with gold lines responded to any of the threads about them? Also, what does CCP think the issues are with Amarr Recons? What ideas do you guys have in order to fix them?
4) Will we see an increase to LADAR gas cloud sites?
5) Is there any discussion on re-balancing low sec and null sec to draw people in (Ship spawns, mission types, ores)?
6) Are there any plans for "stuck" factions?
7) Any status changes on the enviroment and how it can affect combat (Both pve and pvp)?
8) Update on factional warfare? Update on how pirate corporations will correspond?
9) Are there any plans for the web development team to team up with the game development team so that the website can be updated more than once a year? If not, can I have a job + MIRC channel for the dev's? I'll do it for free
10) Status update on using the IGB to view the Backstory section of the website, and using parts of the backstory to make missions more enjoyable?
11) Will we see CCP-backed roleplay events again? (not sure if this can be asked)
mmm, guess thats all i have for now
Project:Gank
Pilgrim Guide
|
Essack Leadae
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 04:00:00 -
[73]
Edited by: Essack Leadae on 13/03/2008 04:00:15 One question only, all others are already asked by many players before my post.
Guns can hit their target while a warpout is initialized, but it is not the case for missiles, who will do nothing in the same situation. Rather unfair. Can CCP explain why, or tell us if a change is expected in the future ?
|
Merin Ryskin
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 05:49:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 13/03/2008 05:50:23 The Caldari railboats were boosted, and this is good. But there were two important ships left out: the Vulture and Merlin. In the case of the Vulture, we were given a vague "it's not a combat ship" response, but I would like a more detailed response to the following points:
1) In fleet situations, active tanking is poor at best, making two of the three shield gang mods worthless in the situations where a Vulture is strongest. Most of the time, you will only fit one gang mod, leaving a high slot layout of 5x guns, 1x gang mod and 1x missile launcher. This kind of split layout was exactly the problem that was finally removed from the Moa, Ferox and Eagle, so why leave out the top rail sniper in the Caldari fleet?
2) Fitting gang mods from another race is of minimal value. Even ignoring the 3%/level bonus, it is only possible to have the critical mindlink for one set of gang mods at a time. Additionally, pilots who are specialized in shield skills (like me) are far less likely to have invested the considerable time required for level V in the other specialization skills. Given the huge jump in effectiveness from Spec IV to Spec V + mindlink, non-racial gang mods are almost completley useless. Add in the fact that most large fleets (where the Vulture is strongest) have specialized boosters for the other racial gang links, and 90% of the time you will not be fitting a gang mod in the 6th high slot.
3) Fitting gang mod-heavy setups at the expense of combat power is rarely a good idea. Since only the best booster's bonuses are actually counted, and no sane fleet commander is going to re-build the fleet structure mid-fight if the booster is killed, command ships need to also have good offensive power to be useful. It's kind of silly that in a 100-man fleet, only a single Vulture is useful (the rest should be flying Eagles now).
4) Treating the Vulture as a "non-combat ship" deprives Caldari pilots of a proper rail command ship. Missile users can upgrade to the Nighthawk and have a true combat ship and an upgrade over the Cerberus, so why shouldn't the railboat pilots have the same option? Since releasing a third command ship (a field command railboat) is extremely unlikely, the only alternative is to give the Vulture full combat ability.
5) Treating the Vulture as a non-combat ship encourages lame combat-avoiding tactics like fitting 7 gang mods and parking the ship behind a POS shield on an alt. Even if the mechanics are changed to force command ships to the front lines, it encourages setups like the uber-tanked heavy missile Vulture, or MWDing 500km away from the fight to the edge of the grid. Encouraging people to stay out of combat and use alts to fly a ship is not fun at all.
6) Upgrading the Vulture to a 6th gun slot maintains proper balance between the Eagle, Vulture, Ferox and Moa. Battlecruisers are meant to be upgrades over their cruiser-class counterparts. The Ferox gets gang mods, an extra turret hardpoint, more slots, more base HP and a drone bay, at the cost of lower speed and higher cost. The Vulture should get the same upgrade over the Eagle. It's just silly to have a bigger, more expensive and much more skill-demanding ship be a step down from the Eagle.
So in summary: the answer that we were given misses a critical point: 95% of the time, the Vulture's 6th gun would NOT be replacing a gang mod, it would be replacing a missile launcher and fixing the split weapon layout that has recently been removed from the Ferox, Eagle and Moa.
|
Merin Ryskin
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 05:50:00 -
[75]
{question 2}
|
Mianna Foreseer
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 09:00:00 -
[76]
I want to know will you try to prevent EVE going to direction where you constantly need to use information sites outside the EVE to do missions and exploration?
Currently there are no any information in the game about resistances and vulnerabilities about pirate factions that is MUST KNOW information for any player to do missions and exploration sites.
Why there is no tactical information point for every mission where player would get some hints and tips about what kind of situation in mission area have? Its kinda funny to me that hard core combat missions agents have not information at all about the enemy, enemy ships nor their equipments or sheer size of their numbers to give to the player.
|
Zothike
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 10:23:00 -
[77]
-Does Minefields in any new forms is on the drawing board ? -What about 'tactical environnement' thread http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=192517 any idea you get about it and planning to developp for a feature expansion ? -About big fleet battle impossible due to lag, what 'gameplay way' are you working on to resolve it (to reasonnable amount of lag)
|
Ethaet
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 12:04:00 -
[78]
Why has trinity 1.1 been advertised as 'nerf free' when it contains nerfs to shield and armour tanking, undocking safely and the raptor's powergrid?
|
ZURAN 666
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 13:29:00 -
[79]
Balancing: What is the difference between a balance and a nerf?
THANK YOU WIKI!!!!!!!!!!!
Quoting from the wiki article on Nerfing. "In computer gaming, a nerf is a change to a game that downgrades the power, effectiveness or influence of a particular game element in the attempt to achieve balance. The term originated as a reference to the NERF brand of child toys, which are made to minimize possible damage. In the same way, "to nerf" describes the action of making something less harmful." Kein Mehrheit Fnr Die Mitleid |
Everard
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 13:38:00 -
[80]
Hi simple concern really I have no real qualms about the boost patch. though I am concerned about whats happening with Asteroid belts and Macroing them cos they no way look like they were a few years back. I know most cans should be disappearing but the belts have been doing that and not coming back fast enough.
|
|
Knoetje
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 14:17:00 -
[81]
I will not be present during the blog and post my question here and hope I will get an answer.
My question is a simple yet irritating one: When will CCP fix the unpinning and random appearance of chat windows on the screen and the overview window? It's very irritating in pvp and something that should have been fixed by now. The overview section of the screen gets messed up when joining fleet and this is a serious problem!! I'm a Goon Titan alt, don't tell anyone. |
Dominique Vasilkovsky
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 14:44:00 -
[82]
What about Science and Industry? Such as starting multiple jobs at once, settings remembered between jobs (range for installation facilities for example).
Any news regarding tech III?
Signature approved by Eldo |
FuQue
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 18:12:00 -
[83]
Here's a question:
How can you justify advertising a 'boost' patch as 'nerf-free' when you essentially have nerfed ALL ships in the ENTIRETY of EvE by reducing their resists?
|
FuQue
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 19:22:00 -
[84]
Another question:
What's your plans with GROME 1.2 software you licensed from Quad Software? Is it for EvE or for your new MMO? Linkage
|
Adunh Slavy
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 19:46:00 -
[85]
Question: Is there any thought to fundemental mechanincs, e.g. how space works. Geting rid of gates, active/passive scanners, altering how warp works, maybe slowing it down so people fight while in warp, etc?
The Real Space Initiative - V5 (Forum Link)
|
Treelox
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:07:00 -
[86]
Question for you,
Why in the hell do you think it is nessacary to SPAM pop-ups ingame for things? Its very distracting and can lead to ships going pop.
Like just now the silly pop-up in game that reminded me about this "live dev blog". Or the past weekends the 2 or 3 pop-ups about the finals for eve tourney just about to start.
If you really feel the need to inform me, and consider that the forums and login news items are not enough. Might it then at least be possible to design a system in game similar to the DT countdown timer, that while present does not take any interaction from me to get it off the top of all my windows, so I can actually play the game. -- Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Wadaya
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:11:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Treelox Question for you,
Why in the hell do you think it is nessacary to SPAM pop-ups ingame for things? Its very distracting and can lead to ships going pop.
Like just now the silly pop-up in game that reminded me about this "live dev blog". Or the past weekends the 2 or 3 pop-ups about the finals for eve tourney just about to start.
If you really feel the need to inform me, and consider that the forums and login news items are not enough. Might it then at least be possible to design a system in game similar to the DT countdown timer, that while present does not take any interaction from me to get it off the top of all my windows, so I can actually play the game.
No kidding. The DT countdown timer and the offline stargate messages use the same box, why can't the crap messages?
Wad
|
Whip Slagcheek
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:21:00 -
[88]
Edited by: Whip Slagcheek on 13/03/2008 20:22:39 I am unable to hear this live dev blog. I have left and joined audio several times.
edit: got audio now. 6th time was the charm
|
|
CCP Zulupark
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:28:00 -
[89]
If you are unable to hear anything in the Live Dev Blog channel, please leave audio on that channel and join it again. If nothing works don't worry, a full recording will be posted soon.
|
|
FuQue
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:32:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Nobues My question is, are any plans in the work to keep the work going on the API tools, you where doing very good things with it, and a loot of good stuff has came from that tool. If there is what will it be?
THIS omg yes.
|
|
Nyabinghi
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:36:00 -
[91]
Q1- Currently we are seeing an ever widening gap between the storyline/NPC element of EVE and the actual player to player gameplay aspect of the game. It's currently hard to roleplay effectively ingame due to the many conflicts between these two aspects of the game. Will the storyline be better integrated into the gameplay in the future?
Q2- Will we see more constructive goals in EVE as most of EVE's gameplay is centered around militarization? ***
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Ranko
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:36:00 -
[92]
I'd like a quick reply/response to the removal of the ALT key functionality?
It is or rather was, a major gameplay tool which everyone used, yet it was nerfed out.
Was this a byproduct nerf or a undocumented feature :P --- Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 ^_^ |
Treelox
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:40:00 -
[93]
Originally by: CCP Zulupark If you are unable to hear anything in the Live Dev Blog channel, please leave audio on that channel and join it again. If nothing works don't worry, a full recording will be posted soon.
much rather have a full transcript
:) -- Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Xaryus
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:42:00 -
[94]
Could we get an explanation to why passive shield resistance modules (like the Dread Guristas Heat Dissappation Amplifier etc) where changed/lowered in resistance values? The DG faction modules went from 40 to 37.5%. In the no nerf patch. No mention anywhere.
|
Preston FateForger
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:45:00 -
[95]
Q: Can you improve 0.0 to attract more people to it? Right now, it *can* be lucrative, but in many ways not as much as Empire space. That's one of the reasons why it isn't nearly as possible.
To attract people to 0.0 (and thus encourage more conflict) it would be nice if there was good ore in more of the systems and better agents in 0.0. ----------------------------------
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.The Elear EVE Video |
Mad Ilya
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:46:00 -
[96]
Exploration - How do you see the future of Hacking/Archeology sites? Loot drops have increased drastically making them not so profitable (skill books, interfaces etc).
Resist change - What are the reasons to end up changing base resists instead of buffing laser weapons? How do you see ship fittings changing due to this?
|
cpu939
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:48:00 -
[97]
Q1 - with eve sound are you ever planing on having a cd/mp3/mp4 player in the eve interface and would this let us have a pause option on the eve voice.
Q2 - with titans become very popular are your going to add another hard ship to obtain e.g. a higher class of ship something bigger, stronger and more powerful.
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Machater
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:48:00 -
[98]
Edited by: Machater on 13/03/2008 20:49:08 how about new types of fighters for carriers and moms, such as bombers, high damage but only useful against huge targets. and interceptor fighters low damage but speedy
|
CEO Saffron
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:50:00 -
[99]
Do you think it would be possible to reduce the reinforced mode on sov claiming towers further? As at the moment clever control of stront lvls allows huge blobs to protect huge areas of space without actually ocupying the space.
|
Machater
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:58:00 -
[100]
While Titans and Motherships are great, there is a real demand for more expensive ships that play a different role than just bigger and better carriers/dreads. What about a T2 carrier, as expensive as a mothership, but smaller than the current carriers. Its role would be a command and control capital. Basically a command ship that can cyno along with the capital fleet and provide various command bonuses designed only for capital ships.
Also a T2 dreadnaught, designed less for POS sieging as capital to capital combat.
|
|
TheCandyGirl
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 20:58:00 -
[101]
I want to know if there will be any change to sentry guns in low sec.
like letting smaller fast ships tank the guns or let people speed tank the guns. or just plain remove them from the gates in low sec or weaken their dmg compared to high sec guns it is supposed to be almost lawless space.
as it stands right now a inti going 7-8km/s will get one shotted and it severely limits what low sec pirate can fly and how they setup their ships ------------------------------------------------ *insert whatever is being whinned about here* is not overpowerd you just suck... it'sfine lrn2playnub
GET IN THE VAN!
I'VE GOT CANDY! |
Little Fistter
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 21:08:00 -
[102]
Where is the link for the "Live Dev Chat" that was announced in game?
I joined the chat channel but no one was there, then I spent almost an hour looking on the web site.
Why can't you guys even do a simple live chat better than this?
Why should we have to go looking for the event?
Is there an event or is this another BS story?
Very frustrated that I continue to pay for this abuse by you.
Another hour of my short life down the tube... Suggestion: Please color jump gates the same color as the system security rating of the destination system in the overview.
LITTLE FISTTER
Broken Sigs?
|
Volarius
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 21:11:00 -
[103]
The recording thats gonna be posted soon, is that soon as in like 1 or 2 hours or soon as in like 1 or 2 weeks? Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. |
Gnulpie
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 21:16:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Little Fistter Where is the link for the "Live Dev Chat" that was announced in game?
I joined the chat channel but no one was there, then I spent almost an hour looking on the web site.
Why can't you guys even do a simple live chat better than this?
Why should we have to go looking for the event?
Is there an event or is this another BS story?
Very frustrated that I continue to pay for this abuse by you.
Another hour of my short life down the tube...
Well, the channel name was Live Dev Blog.
I tried to get the audio working all the time, but it didn't work. Maybe next time just some mp3 stream would be better? I mean, Eve-voice is fine and good, but what is it worth if it is not working as intended (at least for me)?
I hope the mp3 record will be available soon.
|
Zorok
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 21:38:00 -
[105]
With regards about removing the local channel, as a lowsec miner, this is completely unacceptable. By implementing a delayed local count and an "optional" local chat channel you are taking away any benefit to even mining in lowsec space. Already, one can make more money from running missions and going to exploration sites than can be made from mining or ratting. What will happen is that the gank happy ******s will simply jump into a system now, spread out to various asteroid fields and kill any industrial or ratting ship they see. They already do this from time to time and even with local, I barely have enough time to escape. CCP, if you plan to implement this, please consider the consequences for miners. I would ask that if you do this, to eliminate warpable asteroid belts at the same time. Maybe even add a new kind of probe that you can put on a gate that will alert you as to who is coming through the gate (this probe would need to be able to stay active even after the ship docks so that you can change ships for ratting or mining). I don't think this would be an unfair compromise. If you do not do anything to protect the miners and ratters, expect more of us to return to high sec space where your ship will be protected by Concord.
|
Aprudena Gist
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 22:02:00 -
[106]
Can you stop using eve voice for these things is horrible and buggy.
|
Zorok
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 22:39:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Zorok on 13/03/2008 22:42:01 One more question to the devs. You stated that you wanted to make AFs more resistant to webifiers. Is it possible to do the same thing with T2 and Ewar drones? As it stands now, drone ships are extremely vulnerable to webifier ships that pick the drones out like flies. Adding this feature for T2 and Ewar drones would be great.
|
Saori Rei
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 01:38:00 -
[108]
One single question: Any plans on changing the physics of the game so that space ships stop acting like boats at sea? It looks really odd and ruins EvE's otherwise awesome environment. Why -was- the physics engine made this way? Including ships slowing down when their afterburners etc are turned off.
|
Delichon
The First Foundation Stella Polar
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 08:05:00 -
[109]
Anybody, who was present at the event, can provide a brief summary/full transcript/a recording ? ------------------------------------------ All nerfs are meant to hurt you personally. Next time they are going to nerf you directly. Eve Forums. |
|
CCP Wrangler
C C P
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 11:00:00 -
[110]
Thank you to all who posted questions and listened in to the Blog. We will post a recording of the Blog shortly for all those who missed it, hopefully already on Monday next week.
Wrangler Community Manager CCP Games, EVE Online Email / Netfang
Hug-A-Wrangler! FanFest 2008
"The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it." |
|
|
SiJira
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 11:08:00 -
[111]
please do not remove cloakers including scan probes
there is no reason for cloak to be made scannable dont make the module useless ccp Trashed sig, Shark was here |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page] |