EVE Search - proof on how much ccp listens to its customers ....

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

proof on how much ccp listens to its customers ....

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Dez Affinity Evocati.	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:15:00 - [31] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Originally by: Dez Affinity There is no other way to poll those people about the changes if they do not read the only form of inter-communication that works. So? If they really wanted to know a survey could be conducted. The forum is hardly accurate. Assume we have just alts, three characters on each account, 1500/3 is 500. And then god only knows how many people could just post with a second or third account. For all you know one person could be voting one way 9 times (three accounts, three characters on each one). So there is no way you can draw any serious conclusion from this. I know, that was partly my point, but in the same breath it's the only way to tell CCP that they are unhappy with the changes. _______________
Rob Z0mbie	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:15:00 - [32] Edited by: Rob Z0mbie on 08/11/2008 21:17:01 nano nerf = a blessing. the game will be fun again. edit: 3.5 years of eve here, you'll notice that the majority of old timers are in favor of the nerf, tbh, which should say something. \(o.0)/
Dez Affinity Evocati.	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:17:00 - [33] Edited by: Dez Affinity on 08/11/2008 21:18:04 Originally by: Rob Z0mbie nano nerf = a blessing. the game will be fun again. You wish. Originally by: Rob Z0mbie Edited by: Rob Z0mbie on 08/11/2008 21:17:01 edit: 3.5 years of eve here, you'll notice that the majority of old timers are in favor of the nerf, tbh, which should say something. Proof or GTFO. I would wager that it's primarily the opposite. _______________
Crackzilla The Shadow Order	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:17:00 - [34] Edited by: Crackzilla on 08/11/2008 21:21:29 Originally by: Avon CCP have continually nerfed speed tanking AND they should have spotted the trend and acted a long time ago? Which is it? Nanos on larger ships such as battleships have received the nerf bat. Much whinage was heard when this happened. What ccp failed to do was address the nano issue on cruisers. So we're hearing much whinage now. Originally by: Avon A clever person may have noticed that CCP had acted against speed tanking several times in the past, and by understanding that trend they may have realised that nanos were going to get a nerf. I'd argue that CCP hasn't addressed nerfs adequately previously. I think it took them two nerfs before they addressed the issue with battleships. And they took their time on the battleship nerfs. Then they took entirely too long for this nerf. I suspect many against the nano nerf are opposed to the exact implementation versus a nano nerf in general. Surely you've been around long enough to remember your nano/mwd history? Speed is nerfed, a new speed king is found. Speed has historically been one of the better iwin buttons.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:19:00 - [35] Originally by: Crackzilla Surely you've been around long enough to remember your nano/mwd history? Speed is nerfed, a new speed king is found. Speed has historically been one of the better iwin buttons. Which is why I am not surprised it is getting a nerf now, and that I am all in favour of it. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Dez Affinity Evocati.	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:19:00 - [36] Originally by: Crackzilla Originally by: Avon CCP have continually nerfed speed tanking AND they should have spotted the trend and acted a long time ago? Which is it? Nanos on larger ships such as battleships have received the nerf bat. Much whinage was heard when this happened. What ccp failed to do was address the nano issue on cruisers. So we're hearing much whinage now. Surely you've been around long enough to remember your nano/mwd history? Speed is nerfed, a new speed king is found. Speed has historically been one of the better iwin buttons. Completly changing nanofibers and overdrives didn't effect cruisers? Okay! _______________
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:19:00 - [37] Originally by: Dez Affinity Proof or GTFO. I would wager that it's primarily the opposite. I've been here since beta, and I'm all for it. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:21:00 - [38] Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 08/11/2008 21:22:07 Originally by: Dez Affinity I know, that was partly my point, but in the same breath it's the only way to tell CCP that they are unhappy with the changes. It really isn't. First, they have many stats to look at. Say all of a sudden Nanos go from like 10,000 sold a day, to 10 sold a day. That probably means something. And then again, there is a variety of other information they have. Now, if they really wanted to, a simple mass emailed survey would be a better thing to do. Originally by: Avon I've been here since beta, and I'm all for it. How does it feel to be the oldest member of Bob who still logs in? Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:21:00 - [39] This is not a democracy. Get over it.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:24:00 - [40] 1500 accounts leaving because of the nerf would be a small price to pay to help balance the game anyway. Not that they will, but we can dream. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:25:00 - [41] Originally by: Avon 1500 accounts leaving because of the nerf would be a small price to pay to help balance the game anyway. Not that they will, but we can dream. What balance?
Dez Affinity Evocati.	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:27:00 - [42] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Dez Affinity Proof or GTFO. I would wager that it's primarily the opposite. I've been here since beta, and I'm all for it. I said primarily. Not completly, I wouldn't make such a ridiculous accusation that everyone over 2 years old was against it. Originally by: An Anarchyyt It really isn't. First, they have many stats to look at. Say all of a sudden Nanos go from like 10,000 sold a day, to 10 sold a day. That probably means something. And then again, there is a variety of other information they have. Now, if they really wanted to, a simple mass emailed survey would be a better thing to do. Markets stats are all well and good, but I'd wage a bet that more Ravens are sold than Armageddons, that doesn't mean Ravens are over-powered. So while stats like that do aid the overpowered discussion it doesn't confirm it on it's own. It may be just that flying fast ships is fun, not that a fast ship is win against everything, people fly what they like to fly. The idea behind the forum is that people can share the views on the discussion and then CCP cater for the biggest group or try and find an in between. And yes mass e-mailing a survey would be much better but I don't think CCP would be prepared to do that over game changes. Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf This is not a democracy. Get over it. No it's a business. I could teach you a few things about business if you like. _______________
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:28:00 - [43] Originally by: Dez Affinity No it's a business. I could teach you a few things about business if you like. Like voting with your wallet? Go on, teach us. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:28:00 - [44] Originally by: An Anarchyyt The forum is hardly accurate. Assume we have just alts, three characters on each account, 1500/3 is 500. And then god only knows how many people could just post with a second or third account. For all you know one person could be voting one way 9 times (three accounts, three characters on each one). So there is no way you can draw any serious conclusion from this. You appear to be being deliberately dense. You points over numbers of voters are utterly irrelevant. The system has been actioned on 150 votes (suicide ganking). That might have been (using your logic) 16 people. Yet CCP follow it up. SKUNK Originally by: CCP Navigator People who think I am joking or talking big are going to understand very quickly that there will be order
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:29:00 - [45] Originally by: Avon The reason is simple. The people who are whining are wrong. Speed needs rebalancing for the good of the game as a whole, and if people can't see past their own self interest, shame. Ya know it's possible that some people might agree that speed needed nerfing but yet disagreed with the "throw out Risk Analysis and have at the game with a chainsaw" method of nerfing it. ----
Dez Affinity Evocati.	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:30:00 - [46] Originally by: Avon Originally by: Dez Affinity No it's a business. I could teach you a few things about business if you like. Like voting with your wallet? Go on, teach us. Look at you. _______________
Sheriff Jones Amarr Clinical Experiment	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:30:00 - [47] runs in Sorry sorry! Got caught in traffic. But the answer is 1.21 gigawatts at 88 mph. looks around What?! My opinions represent the opinions of my corporation completely. I'm the CEO damnit.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:31:00 - [48] Originally by: Le Skunk You appear to be being deliberately dense. You points over numbers of voters are utterly irrelevant. The system has been actioned on 150 votes (suicide ganking). That might have been (using your logic) 16 people. Yet CCP follow it up. Are you saying that CCP should do what gets the most votes on the CSM forum, rather than action concerns which fit in to their vision of Eve only? Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Tiger313 313th Squadron	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:32:00 - [49] I'm siding with Avon here, I think it's a good thing. I've ran around my corpies in my Crow, having laughs at'm for their missiles and guns not hitting me. Sure, an inty needs to go fast to overtake fleeing ships, but being able to pretty much engage anything in a nano-ship and the enemy not being able to even scratch your paint is not really fair now is it? Now replace the inty for a battleship and you've got an iWin button right there. Not fair at all.
Avon Caldari Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:34:00 - [50] Originally by: Roy Batty68 Ya know it's possible that some people might agree that speed needed nerfing but yet disagreed with the "throw out Risk Analysis and have at the game with a chainsaw" method of nerfing it. But CCP didn't do that. The whole thing evolved on the test server in several stages, and changes were made continually to maintain or improve balance. I doubt many of they whiners actually took part in that - they'd much rather just run around screaming, and repeating anything they are told. Why should the have to take the time to inform themselves? PvP on Sisi is quite different in many ways now, and people don't like change as a rule, but it is pretty darn good. Eve-Online: The Text Adventure
Crackzilla The Shadow Order	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:35:00 - [51] Originally by: Avon Are you saying that CCP should do what gets the most votes on the CSM forum, I knew it!!! My plan for us all to get free ponies shall be victorious! Now to just create a csm thread and get folks to vote on it! a) "I'm for free ponies" b) "I'm for the beating of baby seals".
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:35:00 - [52] Originally by: Le Skunk Originally by: An Anarchyyt The forum is hardly accurate. Assume we have just alts, three characters on each account, 1500/3 is 500. And then god only knows how many people could just post with a second or third account. For all you know one person could be voting one way 9 times (three accounts, three characters on each one). So there is no way you can draw any serious conclusion from this. You appear to be being deliberately dense. You points over numbers of voters are utterly irrelevant. The system has been actioned on 150 votes (suicide ganking). That might have been (using your logic) 16 people. Yet CCP follow it up. SKUNK So what is your point? That 1500 is more than 150? Yes, 1500 is larger than 150, but that does not make it significant. 1.) Both numbers are far shorter than the amount of the playerbase, and not enough large enough to make it look like a cross section of the Eve population. 2.) Many people there have an agenda. In fact, the forums are a very specific part of Eve that the rest usually aren't like. 3.) Due to things like agendas, you can have 6 votes come from one person. That makes these numbers irrelevant. Now, since I know you probably just skipped over anything that made sense, I will point out again, yes 1500 is bigger than 150. No, that doesn't mean anything other than 1500 > 150. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:38:00 - [53] Originally by: Dez Affinity Markets stats are all well and good, but I'd wage a bet that more Ravens are sold than Armageddons, that doesn't mean Ravens are over-powered. So while stats like that do aid the overpowered discussion it doesn't confirm it on it's own. Which is why you need to look at it over a period of time. If you see a cliff-esque decline that would certainly mean something. Or, if you've seen something that doesn't fit in the trends at all, a total reshaping of the status quo. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:39:00 - [54] Edited by: Le Skunk on 08/11/2008 21:40:03 Originally by: Avon Originally by: Le Skunk You appear to be being deliberately dense. You points over numbers of voters are utterly irrelevant. The system has been actioned on 150 votes (suicide ganking). That might have been (using your logic) 16 people. Yet CCP follow it up. Are you saying that CCP should do what gets the most votes on the CSM forum, rather than action concerns which fit in to their vision of Eve only? When the CSM was annoucned (duyring the dev-player incident which helped your alliance) it was announced as: Quote: ôA government canÆt just keep saying, æWe are not corrupt.Æ No one will believe them. ôI envision this council being made up of nine members selected by the players themselves, where you announce your candidacy, and if you win the election, they come here to Iceland, and they can look at every nook and cranny and get to see that we are here to run this company on a professional basis,ö said Mr. Petursson, CCPÆs chief executive. ôThey can see that we did not make this game to win it.ö In the new york times never the less. In its present form it is a bit of a talking shop, where farcical joke threads are considered (trombones in ambulation formaly put to CCP) game styles are crushed due to 200 votes(suicide ganking)and the three biggest protest threads are utterly ignored. I personally would like CCP to recontact the new york times and say they implemented none of the measures the opriginally siad they would, and instead are left with a PR sham, they a) ignore because ITS NOT IN OUR VISION OF EVE INNIT? b) action then crow about FANTASTIC PLAYER DEV COMMUNICATION CONDUITS to any newspaper/website that will listen. The reality is they might shuffle the deck around a little to the applause of fanbois (many of whom have raised their tiny pee-brains in this thread) but its the same deck of cards they are dealing from they started with. SKUNK Originally by: CCP Navigator People who think I am joking or talking big are going to understand very quickly that there will be order
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:43:00 - [55] Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 08/11/2008 21:43:27 Wow, you have some really horribly reading comprehension skills. It is really pointless to argue this with you because you have no idea what you're talking about. "The reality" of it is that you just sound like a spoiled little brat who is upset because mommy took his toy away. Then we can get into the discussion about how just because people didn't express their opinion in a thread makes the number even less significant. Saying, "I support this." also doesn't mean, "I don't support the other" or even "I don't care." Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:47:00 - [56] Edited by: Shadowsword on 08/11/2008 21:46:56 A lot of those 1500 weren't around before the nano***gotry age, they don't know what it was like. Therefore this vote is worthless due to lack of objectivity. You can keep screaming that guerilla warfare is dead if you wish, it amuse me... ------------------------------------------
Zak Zerachiel Caldari Slacker Industries	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:48:00 - [57] Originally by: Holy Lowlander This post got the most votes ever in a CSM post and greatly outnumbers the amount of whines about the 'overpowered' nano's . Are you friggin' serial? Do you not remember when the 2nd post in every thread was "not another nano nerf"?
Le Skunk Low Sec Liberators	Posted - 2008.11.08 21:52:00 - [58] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Edited by: An Anarchyyt on 08/11/2008 21:43:27 Wow, you have some really horribly reading comprehension skills. It is really pointless to argue this with you because you have no idea what you're talking about. "The reality" of it is that you just sound like a spoiled little brat who is upset because mommy took his toy away. Then we can get into the discussion about how just because people didn't express their opinion in a thread makes the number even less significant. Saying, "I support this." also doesn't mean, "I don't support the other" or even "I don't care." Ahh one of the pee-brain fanbois i was talking about. No idea eh? So care to contradict any of my points? No? Ok bye then. PS whats a pubbie? SKUNK Originally by: CCP Navigator People who think I am joking or talking big are going to understand very quickly that there will be order
Ticondrius ANZAC ALLIANCE	Posted - 2008.11.08 22:08:00 - [59] I seem to recall twice before when speed got nerfed. First was the dual MWDs and the MWD/AB combo fittings. In my Thorax with a MWD and AB, I could reach speeds of 15km/sec, which at the time made me almost invulnerable to gate camps, even while on autopilot. And somewhere around the same time, the first nano nerf, though few realized what it actually was. It was introduced along with a lot of other modules being nerfed to have 'diminishing returns', and most folks were rabbling on about how their gankageddons were worthless now because having 8 heat sinks no longer made them able to oneshot anything smaller than a battleship. Nanos were once able to stack in such a way as to reduce the mass of some very specific ships to ZERO MASS. We all know the formula for acceleration. What happens when mass goes bye bye? I had a Dominix that could reach warp speeds without actually engaging the warp drive. I'd gone some 600AU from stars to make impossible to find safespots just on a MWD. It was very hard to stop too... So why drag up this bit of history? Ships are NOT meant to go ultra fast. Certainly not cruisers and battleships. Even among the frigates, only the T1 and 2 interceptors are really meant to be able to run a MWD forever with the proper skills. When ships begin to go past a certain speed, the game mechanics break down, take my gatecamp rushing Thorax I mentioned. They couldn't even web me before I was gone. So why did CCP ignore a petition that demands they keep game breaking mechanics in the game? Oh, right, because IT BREAKS THE GAME. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- RABBLE! RABBLERABBLE!! MMORPG: Many Men Online Role Playing Girls
Mynxee Hellcats Doom Armada	Posted - 2008.11.08 22:23:00 - [60] Meh. I fly a lot of nanoed ships and the nerf doesn't bother me. Adapt and survive, kids. Life in Low Sec \| Hellcats

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.