Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
GTC4ME
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:43:00 -
[61]
why is the jump portal activation range on a titan only 2500m? why hasnt it been increased to facilitate the bridging of large fleets without massive desyncs? |
Athanasios Anastasiou
The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:47:00 -
[62]
2 topics that I feel are really important.
1. There is waaaay to much isk in the economy right now. I remember when the number of ships your side destroyed actually mattered. Nowadays, the logistics of getting a battleship hurts more then then actually purchasing it (with jumpbridges, insane numbers of titans, jump freighters, this is becoming too easy). Both sides are free to blob as much as they want because there is almost no consequence to loosing ships.
Just look at GBC cs NC. They are systematically destroying thousands of fleet bs, but the battles have very little direct impact on the war (which is determined mostly by capital ships and morale). The only point in fleet battles even happening at all these days is to secure the systems for capitals. Because, frankly, loosing bs doesn't matter anymore. As such, small gang gang warfare has even less impact on any 0.0 power. Making isk these days is just too easy. Does CCP have any plans to make isk much more valuable? So we can have fleet battles for the sake of doing damage, not just clearing a way for a capfleet?
2. CCP has always said they want to promote small gang warfare. However, you have introduced jump bridges, titan bridging, etc, all of which makes defensive blobbing that much easier (and as a result, make offensive blobbing even more nessecary. Is there any changes that _actually_ reduce blobbing?
|
Ricdic
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:49:00 -
[63]
Edited by: Ricdic on 24/10/2008 16:51:49 Important Question:
In the upcoming industrial patch will CCP make it so that anyone with sufficient roles can modify / cancel corporate sell/buy orders? In current form the only way a production corporation can work this is by account sharing which is obviously far from optimal.
It's an incredibly simple request and perfectly in line with the industrial patch.
(in case anyone doesn't understand. If I create a sell order for 1000 tritanium through the corp wallet only I have the power to modify or cancel this order. I can't have my trusted corp mate (with full rights) modify the order at all. Means my corp mate theoretically would need to log into my account just to modify my order which is obviously against the EULA) |
Khandara Seraphim
StarHunt Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:50:00 -
[64]
Edited by: Khandara Seraphim on 24/10/2008 16:55:19 Edited by: Khandara Seraphim on 24/10/2008 16:51:07 followup on the logoffski, which wasn't fully addressed the way I'd hoped.
Are you saying CCP has no plans to address this, or are you saying that CCP is trying and hasn't figured it out yet.
Would you agree that the majority of combat disconnections (i.e. at a gate when jumping in) are from players abusing the system rather than legitimate disconnects?
Do you agree that players taking the time to probe out someone's logoff spot and camp there should have the ability to finish them off upon their logging on?
I for one would be much happier losing the occasional ship to a disconnection if it meant people would stop getting away using one of the most frustrating tactics possible in Eve. Would you agree that the nonconsensual pvp style of eve requires that parties need to be able to be forced into a combat situation even when they don't want to be? Like a freighter jumping into a lowsec camp?
edit- this last question is also relevant to cloaking, I suppose. While ships that are supposed to be cloaked should be hard to find, the legions of cloaking ratting ships combined with local make actually hunting one of these targets in 0.0 almost impossible if they're at all intelligent. What do you think of that?
|
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:50:00 -
[65]
Edited by: LaVista Vista on 24/10/2008 16:54:32 Will we be able to pillage outposts next year some time? Maybe disable docking services? What do you think about the CSM? What things have the influenced you on? Do you think low-sec is attractive enough as it is? How are you going to make FW more fun? Can we please get some better forum software? When will we be able to do mass-job installations? So install the same job 5 times without having to repeat ourselves? Will we ever be able to tweak our invention jobs more? So add 2 BPC's and get more runs out of our job, for instance? Can you remove jump bridges(Inspired by poster 2 posts above me).
|
Evelgrivion
Athanasius Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:52:00 -
[66]
Edited by: Evelgrivion on 24/10/2008 16:52:59 What is the reasoning for not changing blasters, given the dramatic changes to speed and warp scrambling mechanics and the input that overwhelmingly concludes that the weapons system's effectiveness has been affected to an extremely detrimental degree? |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:53:00 -
[67]
Can we have another Armageddon Day? |
Tippia
Caldari School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:59:00 -
[68]
When will we see premium graphics on Mac/Linux, and when do we get the devblog on the topic — the one we've been promised for the last 6–7 months? |
W3370Pi4
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:00:00 -
[69]
Edited by: W3370Pi4 on 24/10/2008 17:00:30 Future of miners Capital mining ship one day eventually ?
More holidays event is it possible ? |
Tal Nok
Amarr Digital assassins G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:03:00 -
[70]
Are there any plans on increasing the number of ships that will be ingame, especially for the destroyer class?
Are there any plans on developing a AOE (or targeted) weapon much like a bomb launcher that increases the "heat" (or damage) of modules that will make them burn out quicker or eventually become destroyed without using nano paste? Or perhaps a form of Ewar bubbles?
Are there any plans on developing a better insurance plan for T2 ships (more specific to the question asked previously)?
Are there any plans on developing an in-game npc banking system for high intrest loans and low intrest accounts?
Will Jove ever be opened to players?
With current game mechanics, everyone has the same ship layout slots. Rigs were created to give more options to fitting. Are there any plans on developing customizations of slot layouts at the cost of other slots/shields/armor/structure/resists to increase possible fits to ships?
Will there ever be plans for a globalized market with region selections to view prices of items outside of your current region?
The bounty system is borked. Are there plans to fix the bounty system?
The EVE backdrop is nice, but seems to be the same nebule in every system. Are there any plans on creating different looking nebule?
Roids are roids, minerals are minerals, ice is ice. Mini professions gave us salvage, gas clouds, hacking, and I forgot the other one. Are there any plans to introduce new material to be used for production?
Faction warefare was fun. Small roaming gangs end up blob vs blob. 0.0 Fleet fights are fun but laggy. Missions make you a zombie. Are there any plans on including NPC Fleets for system takeovers to participate in for FW?
0.0 warfare for system take overs becomes rather boring. Blow up pos A,B,C,D,E, spam towers in place. Shoot station. Protect pos's from being destroyed. A question was posed earlier about system sov in which you gave an answer that you know it needs changing and will be looking into. Beyond attempting to make a single gun inactive on a heavily gunned POS with a group of 5 ships and being destroyed, or bubble camping systems, will there be any plans where small gangs can be of greater annoyance (not takeovers) to sov holding systems?
Will space mines ever come back?
Capitals are easier to get, and we are stuck with a total of 4 pvp worthy capitals per race. Are there any plans to create more capitals that are mission specific?
Are you tired of all my questions? |
|
Evelgrivion
Athanasius Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:04:00 -
[71]
Edited by: Evelgrivion on 24/10/2008 17:04:29 What do you think of the idea to give Titans a configurable, small area of effect death-ray as a replacement to the doomsday device's current functionality? |
Zeroskills
Endgame.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:13:00 -
[72]
Two questions:
1. "Nerf Scalpel"
Is there any possibility that CCP could address simple "easy fix" balance issues on a faster time scale? Perhaps something like the Guild Wars model, which implemented incremental stat-oriented balance tweaks on a regular basis.
It seems that significant developer resources go into major balance-related design changes (e.g. the speed rebalance , changes to Nosferatu modules, reduction in unbonused EWAR effectiveness, implementation of turret tracking, torpedo redesign, etc.). Comparatively few developer resources appear dedicated to smaller statistical tweaks (e.g. battlecruiser shield regen, caldari capital CPU, siege torp HP, autocannon RoF, etc.) -- an understandable consequence of a long development pipeline full of major projects.
A faster implementation of incremental balance changes would be useful given the coming speed rebalance. The complex knock-on effects of these sweeping changes guarantee that Sisi testing won't uncover every resulting balance problem. Once problems reveal themselves on TQ, I want to measure CCP's response time in months, rather than quarters or years. Silly things like the Typhoon having less ArmorHP than ShieldHP and T2 ammo being either amazing (sniper ammo) or underpowered (close range high damage) makes it hard to have confidence in timely fixes.
Would CCP consider creating a small team of devs dedicated to quickly identifying balance issues and implementing fixes, perhaps on a monthly basis? Perhaps you can call them "Balance Ninjas" and give them cool t-shirts. But someone at CCP needs to "own" the fine tuning of ships and modules -- the nerf scalpel, rather than nerf bat. CCP needs to replace its haphazard approach to "little fixes" with something systemic -- the laudable, but overdue, Citadel Torp HP boost got attention after a dev stumbled onto a 50 page thread and took the initiative.
Lastly, the nerdiest and less ideological members of EVE's player base, as well as recent CCP hires therefrom, could be a great resource for data and ideas.
2. A New UI
Is a completely redesigned UI currently in the pipeline? EVE's current UI compares very poorly to those in MMOs of the last several years.
Specific issues that need to be addressed: - color blindness usability (ARRRGHH! WHY ALWAYS RED AND GREEN?!) - remappable hot keys - customizable buttons (I shouldn't need a drop down menu to change orbit from 15km to 20km) - much less busy module display (those poor little buttons are overfilled with module activation, heat activation, heat damage, ammo, and now cycle timers and weapon linking) - sharable overview and bracket settings - less reliance, generally, on drop down menus and mouse clicks -- more keybinds and buttons - no more random window movement, resizing, snap-to neighbors, etc.
|
phanthom chancer
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:16:00 -
[73]
Given the changes made in the upcoming "nano nerf" how exactly do you think blasters will remain fine?
You were also quoted as believing blasters would possibly be better. In exactly what ways?
Increase to tracking on blasters was mentioned as a possible boost to help counteract the web nerf. How did you determine that such a boost was not necessary?
|
teji
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:21:00 -
[74]
Edited by: teji on 24/10/2008 17:22:36 Why do NPC regions have effective -1.0 truesec when they are easier to hold/less risk than conq regions.
Also why do hybrid regions retain the -1.0 truesec throughout the conquerable part of the region?
Are there any plans to re-balance regions so that each region will have something valuable in it, making it worth holding?
|
Shard Merchant
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:21:00 -
[75]
You've earned redemption for yesterday's crappy blog, Zulupark. Although a fair number of the "good" questions won't be answered until FF, but I don't see that as your fault.
The two major points for me:
I'm overwhelmed with joy that local is FINALLY getting the change it needs AND that we have a goddamn timeline for its implementation.
However, the fact that CCP is considering, thinking, planning, and deliberating over so many seemingly minor issues but hasn't even looked seriously into the risk vs reward balance of high sec is utterly ridiculous. We all knew lvl 4's should be in low sec from the start, and so I agree with your personal opinions. It was stated repeatedly CCP wants to give lowsec more oomph (your words yesterday), so doesn't it stand to reason that nerfing the absurd income of high-sec dwellers is part of that?
Please, if you can answer just that one bit, I will be very glad.
|
Sophie Daigneau
Risky Advanced Production Enterprises GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:27:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Sophie Daigneau on 24/10/2008 17:29:12 Are there any plans to make the t2 market and moon mining scale better by removing the artificial cap on dysprosium moons that's holding everything back currently?
Edit: Are there any plans to fix the broken game mechanic of building items in empire purely for the purpose of transporting large quantities of tritanium/pyerite to 0.0 for production? Will we get a way of moving compressed tritanium over vast distances for a reasonable cost?
|
Joshua Calvert
Caldari Safespot Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:29:00 -
[77]
Do you feel there is enough specialization and diversification in ships/modules currently? Despite such choice it still seems there are definite favourites/flavours of the month - do you have plans for new classes/types of ship or have you got enough specialist areas covered now?
Peace and love, Josh
|
Raneru
Euphoria Released
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:30:00 -
[78]
A long long time ago on the drawingboard section there was a mention of implementing demo recording like in FPS games so we could replay fights, etc. Are there any plans to implement this in the future?
|
Idara
Caldari Failure Corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:31:00 -
[79]
Zulupark:
End yourself. You clearly have no clue about the game. --- Failure Corp [FAILD] - Failing to fail first
in EVE - Idara |
Junko Ni'Kan
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:33:00 -
[80]
Do you think the Naglfar is balanced compared to the other dreadnoughts with its split weapons, overall fairly low dmg/tank and longish training?
|
|
Una D
Ex Coelis The Bantam Menace
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:33:00 -
[81]
I would love to know the reason behind not making orca do mineral compression. As I see it, it would improve the isk/hour for human players as 1 hauler could service more than 2-3 hulks. It would enable shipping of low ends to 0.0 making the logistics (the boring part) easier on players there. Removing exceedingly boring parts from the game can't be bad and hauling around minerals is one of the worst parts. It could create a whole new economy as well as free up construction slots that are now being used for mineral compression (it's either that or haul more).
PS: I really really hope you reconcider and put ore compression on orca. :)
|
Amarr Holymight
Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:34:00 -
[82]
Bounty hunting fix is a long time coming have you made any progress?
Will ambulation serve a purpose, or will it be just to look cool and attract new players?
Javelin is never used because it has a terrible penalty for usage, (eg close range ammo slowing down the ship) has this been looked at?
|
chicken tika
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:35:00 -
[83]
which has more hit points a jaffa cake or a rich tea?
|
panman
The Radiated Space Gerbils
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:37:00 -
[84]
EOS:
Remove more turrets and give it 5 heavy drone. Its too similar to a myrmidon apart from the extra 2 gang links |
Rainsdon
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:38:00 -
[85]
Will Faction Warfare hit the 0.0 factions (Guristas, Serpentis, Thukker ect) and take part in 0.0 space as-well-as low-sec space?
|
Bartholomeus Crane
Gallente The Crane Family
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:39:00 -
[86]
T2 BPOs provide an unfair advantage to the monopolists that have them over the many industrialists left with using invention. When invention was introduced there was a discussion by Oveur and Kieron that you were looking at ways of either removing the advantage or removing the T2 BPOs with some compensation. Dr. EjyoG stated that he will address the T2 market in a QEN later this year. Given that neither Oveur or Kieron are still working on EVE, is anyone still looking at these issues? Will mechanisms be introduced to reduce the unfair advantages? When will they be deployed? |
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:39:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Chaos Incarnate on 24/10/2008 17:39:33 Who un-fixed my face again?
Do you (or the developers in charge of it) feel that the tech1 destroyers are a strong ship class?
Do you think that the current rigs system is fair to smaller ships, where it costs as much to t2 rig a titan as a rifter?
Would you consider introducing a mobile ship-fitted cynojammer module to allow roaming gangs some vague protection from hotdropping?
On that note, are you happy with the current system cynojammer mechanics?
Are you comfortable with multiple DDs being used as an alphastrike that no ships can seriously survive?
Do you (personally) keep tabs on alliance warfare?
What ships do you fly in PvP?
Would you at the consider adding additional decent-quality (10+) level 4 agents to those highsec regions who are in dire need of love (most of the non-Domain Amarr regions - Kador, Tash-Murkon, Devoid, Derelik, Khanid, etc)? Maybe just to take the burden off of The Forge? :o
Is there any way that the mobile lab copy and invention bugs can be fixed? It'd be an excellent boon to the current system of research alliances.
Is it going to eventually be possible to queue up multiple invention jobs, at least for the short-running jobs (~2hrs)? |
Imperius Blackheart
Caldari KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:43:00 -
[88]
Motherships, cost/performance ratio seems all out of wack and since the introduction of Hictors they are surprisingly vulnerable, any plans to review?
|
Dr Aryandi
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:43:00 -
[89]
Excellent idea for a thread. I hope you have time to really answer all the questions!
I have a question about invention and Midas - are you going to be doing anything with it? In particular will the input ME and PE of BPCs finally effect the output and allow us to put some work into that and finally break away from the simple math that means everyone is best off just using a certain decryptor. Even if you divide the input BPC by 10 then add it that would be good.
Also there was some discussion a year or so ago about allowing invented BPCs to be researched to improve them. Either of these would help open up the invention market...
Split weapon systems (i.e. typhoon/merlin etc) are not 'flexible' they are annoying. Why not have the merlin with 3/3 and phoon with 5/5 for example and have them actually flexible rather than just described that way?
|
Faraelle Brightman
Gallente Placid Reborn
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:45:00 -
[90]
Faction Warfare updates/enchancements: When? Soon? Pretty please? Anything definate in the queue you can share?
Changes to mining/asteroid belts comming in Midas? Will mining ever be something you can do more with than activate lasers, stare at screen and hope no one comes along to blow you up?
Plans for any of the following: T2 Mining Frigate? Specialized salvager ship? Specialized science vessel? (hire Novafox!)
Is there any more teaser Ambulation art you guys can release to tide us over until Fanfest?
Isn't this format way better than the audio devblog?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |