EVE Search - Lot less color in the game these days.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Lot less color in the game these days.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ralara Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.05.05 17:21:00 - [31] Originally by: Diek Ran Originally by: 000Hunter000 Erm... can i have my skilltime and investment back then please? Nobody wants to give that up, sure. But 30 vs 30 capships and nothing else just doen't feel right somehow. Um.. tough sh1t? -- Ralara / Ralarina "SMASH is probably the alliance most immune to failure cascade, why? because their is no organisation to collapse its just a random mish mash of various players."
Diek Ran Amarr Autonums	Posted - 2008.05.05 17:26:00 - [32] U like sh1t don't u?
Scoutette	Posted - 2008.05.05 17:38:00 - [33] Originally by: Ralara Originally by: Diek Ran Nobody wants to give that up, sure. But 30 vs 30 capships and nothing else just doen't feel right somehow. Um.. tough sh1t? Ya, the last time CCP suggested doing something about capship only fleets, the sh1t sure hit the fan. They should still do something about it, but I don't know what.
Jas Dor Minmatar	Posted - 2008.05.05 18:12:00 - [34] Well I just hope CCP realizes that at the current rate folks as skilling for capships, the number of cap pilots and ships will double between now and Christmas. 30 v. 30 all capships is one thing but what happens when we start seeing 60 v. 60 or 100 v. 100. Hell is there even anything in the game, isk wise, worth taking the risk of a 100 v. 100 capfight? Names, Dates, Times, Engagements, Losses, Op-Tempo or STFU!
Pwett Minmatar QUANT Corp. QUANT Hegemony	Posted - 2008.05.05 18:31:00 - [35] Originally by: Jas Dor Hell is there even anything in the game, isk wise, worth taking the risk of a 100 v. 100 capfight? Destroying the 100 hostile capships. _______________ Pwett CEO, Founder, & Executor <Q> QUANT Hegemony
Face Lifter	Posted - 2008.05.05 18:38:00 - [36] Originally by: Jas Dor Well I just hope CCP realizes that at the current rate folks as skilling for capships, the number of cap pilots and ships will double between now and Christmas. 30 v. 30 all capships is one thing but what happens when we start seeing 60 v. 60 or 100 v. 100. Hell is there even anything in the game, isk wise, worth taking the risk of a 100 v. 100 capfight? Then CCP can release a new ship that's even bigger and more powerful than titans and motherships combined. Then all the alliances would struggle to get this new super ubership and current cap ships will be used as trivially as battleships are used now.
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.05 18:54:00 - [37] Edited by: Patch86 on 05/05/2008 18:55:19 The problem with Cap Ships is that they're just too darned good. Battelships should always have been kept as the pinnacle of ship-killing ships. Dreads should have been left where they were originally- POS, Station and Cap Ship killers. Carriers as they are should never have been created- instead, they should have been battle-logistics ships (which they already are; they just shouldn't have had the "giant drones of death", making them great fleet combatants). Motherships should have been the only "carrier" ships (with the giant drones of death), seeing as Mothership use is still hugely restricted by the price tag. Titans were, in my opinion, a mistake- a weapon that can kill/cause large amounts of damage to an entire fleet of non-capital ships should never have seemed like a good idea in a multiplayer game; it's simply not much fun, for either side. Battleships should still be the workhorse of the fleets. Ships as small as Cruisers are even useful in fighting Battleships, leaving the game wide open to all players. The same thing certainly can't be said of Capitals. It's already getting the way that, because of lag, FC's are telling non-Capital pilots to just stay at home, to let the legions of Capitals get on with the fighting. And it's only going to get worse... ------ Originally by: Dark Shikari The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2008.05.05 20:05:00 - [38] Add 3 times more space of all type. Hi, Low and No-Sec. Lot's of problems solved then. It's just too damned crowded now and getting worse.
Spoon Thumb Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.05.05 20:33:00 - [39] With regards to 0.0, only those organisations who are 100% comitted and highly organised are surviving. All the weaker entities are slowly being pushed out. Basically, people have worked out "the best" or optimal way to run an alliance, conduct fleet warfare etc etc and are just applying it. To quote someone else who I've now forgotten who it was, Eve is entering the end-game of an RTS where everyone has massive blobs of the best units and huge defences and it is just a case of making your force come to bear
Cybele Lanier Amarr The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2008.05.05 22:28:00 - [40] Originally by: Sabrin Kulu Because in real life we don't lag when we group together. What, you don't remember how on D-Day, the Allied forces landed on the beaches and froze in place for fifteen minutes, getting wiped out before they could even see what was going on? --------------- ""Minimum collateral damage" and "Entire star system" do not belong in the same sentence."
Istvaan Shogaatsu Caldari Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2008.05.05 22:30:00 - [41] Don't worry. The era of blocs is almost over.
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2008.05.06 00:16:00 - [42] Originally by: Emily Evermore Originally by: Sabrin Kulu Originally by: Emily Evermore Why are you guys trying to go against the natural order of things? People will always group together like in RL. Because in real life we don't lag when we group together. Oh we don't? Have you ever been in automobile traffic or leave a large national sporting event? on Sundays i would rather go to jita than the local market
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.05.06 00:31:00 - [43] Originally by: Akita T Neah, just decrease signature of target being fired on with each additional ship that fires, and add a ECM-like effect (much smaller random chance) the more people are firing. Basically, the more people fire, the longer it takes to lock a target, and the higher the chance for one of the firing ships to lose lock. Anti-focus-fire method ? Check Bad idea. It pushes everyone towards larger ships even more than currently. As larger ships will typically have a greater effect per person. Nerfing the blob in these artificial manners is not beneficial to the game Vote Goumindong for CSM
Xtreem Gallente Knockaround Guys Inc. Exxxotic	Posted - 2008.05.06 03:33:00 - [44] introduce dead systems, several jumps wide between regions, i dunno natural universal sread or somthing, making things further aprart, then add 5x more 0.0 space, allow people to spread, cap ships will have longer to warp, needing more logisitcs etc to do anything. will help things thin out for a while till we can get some new kit with advances and when the same thing happens the new advances in hardware will allow the same again
Mara Rinn Minmatar	Posted - 2008.05.06 11:33:00 - [45] Perhaps requiring "control points" to allow ships to jump into a system might help? Want to bring more ships in? Go for it. Each frigate is worth 1 control point, each Titan is worth 100 control points. Each system can handle 1000 control points maximum, after which jump gates don't work and cyno fields shut down. Perhaps allow POS presence in a system to 'reserve' control points for members of the corporation that own the POS? Want to claim sovereignty over a system? Build more pylons!
Exodus Alpha	Posted - 2008.05.06 11:46:00 - [46] Originally by: Mara Rinn Perhaps requiring "control points" to allow ships to jump into a system might help? Want to bring more ships in? Go for it. Each frigate is worth 1 control point, each Titan is worth 100 control points. Each system can handle 1000 control points maximum, after which jump gates don't work and cyno fields shut down. Perhaps allow POS presence in a system to 'reserve' control points for members of the corporation that own the POS? Want to claim sovereignty over a system? Build more pylons! And when one side manages to hold all 1000 "control points" (or even 75% of that), the other side does...what? There was a variation of this earlier that I saw only in raw ship numbers rather than points allocated based on ship class. This is a flawed idea, though more ideas are always a step in the right direction.
Tiirae The New Era HUZZAH FEDERATION	Posted - 2008.05.06 13:13:00 - [47] Edited by: Tiirae on 06/05/2008 13:14:05 When a space gets crowded, there will be a period of fighting over the resources, followed by massive alliances forming because the other side is already too big or is already in a coalition themselves. Only way to fix it is to reduce competition for resources by making more of them available. we do need some competition, but at the moment it is too intense. If they doubled or tripled the size of the universe it would set the clock back a couple of years and we could have fun again. Adding or changing mechanics to try and stop blobbing won't help. players will find a way to blob again, guaranteed.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.