Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Quazal Atreides
Gallente Tectrian Ventures
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 09:34:00 -
[1]
Ok will be a first time voter ;)
But my question to the delegates...
If you could remove a single aspect or function from the game which would it be?
As an example mine would be the can baiters who sit in 1.0 & 0.9 with cans like "great free gear for noobs" written on them in the hope of killing a 3 day character. Yes its against the rules in the starter system but not 1 jump out.
Thats my example can you offer yours.
Thanks and good luck to all the candidates for friday |
LaVista Vista
Conservative Shenanigans Party
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 09:37:00 -
[2]
I would probably remove Jump Bridges.
They amplify blobbing and they make it almost risk-less to move across space.
|
Quazal Atreides
Gallente Tectrian Ventures
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 09:48:00 -
[3]
thanks for the quick response, and as a side note love the corp name *wonders is it named after the uk conservative party* |
Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 10:29:00 -
[4]
I would personally like to see Eve without alts, as people avoid consequences by using alts for criminal actions or as an anonymous income source for other activities.
And I'd like to see Eve without smacktalkers and other childish people, and I suppose people that canbait noobs fall into that catagory as well.
But neither of the two are realistic, unfortunately.
I agree with LaVista that jumpbridges are a plague in 0.0, and makes it too easy for large alliances to hold space without having vulnerable supply lines. It also invalidates small gang PVP.
Bah. I rather add things to Eve than remove things... |
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 11:12:00 -
[5]
A single thing to be removed? The first thing that comes to mind is Doomsdays in their present form - switch them to either targeted damage or EWar, or maybe both(give people a choice). It's not as important as some other changes, but it's the top thing on my list that would qualify as a removal.
Removing jump-based transportation might be cool, but it will never happen, especially not now that Jump Freighters have been introduced. And the idea of removing alts is madness. As for can baiting, the warning messages should be written in such a way that what happens is made obvious to the 3-day noob, since they still actually read warning messages. The people who do it are pathetic, but they don't need to be nerfed explicitly.
|
Omber Zombie
Gallente Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 12:33:00 -
[6]
the current sov system (replaced by something better) ----------------------
CSM 08 Blog |
Bunyip
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 12:43:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Quazal Atreides If you could remove a single aspect or function from the game which would it be?
For me, I'd have to say the T1 meta 0 loot drops from NPCs. They're depleting the market for the creation of T1 items, and they're flooding the market with minerals - sometimes even gaining more minerals per time period than mining would. Meta 1 or higher items will remain in rat droppings, but get rid of the meta 0.
|
Julius Rigel
House Rigel
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 14:42:00 -
[8]
If I could remove one thing from EVE, I would remove NPCs.
Now you can regret not paying me to run for CSM, eh.
Scared of the events forum? |
Tchell Dahhn
Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:06:00 -
[9]
I'd remove the "Emergency Warp" ability of all ships, so that the 'logoffski' trick would no longer work.
If your Internet Connection goes down, your kid flips the power switch, your Wife pulls the plug, you have a brownout, a blackout, you spill coffee on your computer, you have a flash flood, your water breaks, what have you, your ship stays in space... ...exactly where it is... until you log back on.
It's all part of the experience, IMHO. For RP purposes, during the time you were away from the game, your ship's systems had a catastrophic failure, and Scotty was busy rerouting power from the Bridge Controls to Main Engineering. If you get back in time to save your ship, fine. If not, you're in your pod, or you're in your Clone Bay.
Now, aren't you glad I'm not a Candidate? (I wanted to post, to give our Candidates something to think about, or discuss.)
We're Recruiting! |
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:30:00 -
[10]
AoE doomsdays
Sov and bridges just need some tweaking, the complains of the above are totally unfounded, we "blobbed" just as much before they were implemented.
|
|
Quazal Atreides
Gallente Tectrian Ventures
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 15:40:00 -
[11]
thank you all for your response (both candidates and non candidates ) well good luck too you all on friday.... and please who ever gets in bash ccp over head about the patch day problems [/url] |
Arithron
Gallente Gallente Trade Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 17:19:00 -
[12]
Security status restrictions and responses in below .8 systems :)
Gates have responses (dwindling as sec gets lower), all other areas are a little wild...
This is a 'wish', not something I'll be advocating!
Arithron Vote Arithron for CSM! Check out my thread: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=899358 |
Jade Constantine
Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 19:10:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Goumindong Sov and bridges just need some tweaking, the complains of the above are totally unfounded, we "blobbed" just as much before they were implemented.
Completely untrue and off base. Whilst "blobbing" obviously occured before the deployment of jump bridges and cyno jammers - it was something that both sides could do. Now only the defender can blob capitals via jump bridge into a cyno jammed system with inpunity and that throws out the balance and chances for a decent engagement.
Most people now see that the balance in 0.0 warfare is wrong and its certainly the case that over-proliferatiion of jump-bridges and cyno-jammers have removed a critical element from the game of eve online that we can call "fun". Jump bridges promote threat-free logistics and make it easier to build vast space holding alliances that nobody has the patience to remove.
Cyno-jammers are single module that ensure overwhelming capital ship superiority for the defender and act as a massive disincentive to aggressive warfare.
But combine the two modules together and you have the root-cause of many of the ills in the 0.0 game. I can understand why you are pro status quo on this issue Goumindong because you come from an organisation with a vast jump bridge network that holds space protected by cyno-jammers (that you would not be able to hold in their absense) but as a CSM delegate you need to learn to see the bigger picture and appreciate the future health of the game beyond your personal biased view of status quo maintenance.
Fortunately I'm pretty convinced that CCP are already convinced that 0.0 need to change urgently and there is limit to the damage you could do on the CSM panel - but its useful for the electorate to see your gut instinct on the sovereignty tool issue is to slightly move around the deckchairs on the Titanic rather than make an honest attempt to actually avoid the iceburg altogether.
|
Goumindong
Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 20:08:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Goumindong on 19/11/2008 20:08:31
Originally by: Jade Constantine ...
So, what you're saying is that I am right and that you have no clue what we are talking about? Gotcha.
1. Yes, there are issues with Sov and Bridges, they need some tweaking. You would notice that i said "they need some tweaking".
2. No, they do not cause people to blob any more than they did, it just changes how those blobs got into the system. You will notice that the claim had nothing to do with logistics, creating empires, or capital ships. It simply has to do with a simple claim that the bridges cause "blobbing". This is false. Hell, you just admitted it was false.
3. The statements made earlier said that these needed to be completely rewritten and, in the case of jump bridges, removed. This is simply not true. A number of tweaks, like not allowing jump capable capitals to use jump bridges, and tweaking POS so that strategic modules are easier to disable with small gangs entirely solves the complaints regarding jump bridges.
Now stop lying about me, my goals, and how the game works and do something productive with your time. |
Issler Dainze
Minmatar Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2008.11.19 23:35:00 -
[15]
If I could remove one thing in Eve it would be....
Low sec gate camps. The guns at the gates should be enough to keep those gates safe. I don't believe CCP intended folks to be able to sit and tank them all day. Otherwise they wouldn't have put them there in the first place.
Issler
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.20 08:06:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Jade Constantine Completely untrue and off base. Whilst "blobbing" obviously occured before the deployment of jump bridges and cyno jammers - it was something that both sides could do. Now only the defender can blob capitals via jump bridge into a cyno jammed system with inpunity and that throws out the balance and chances for a decent engagement.
Most people now see that the balance in 0.0 warfare is wrong and its certainly the case that over-proliferatiion of jump-bridges and cyno-jammers have removed a critical element from the game of eve online that we can call "fun". Jump bridges promote threat-free logistics and make it easier to build vast space holding alliances that nobody has the patience to remove.
Cyno-jammers are single module that ensure overwhelming capital ship superiority for the defender and act as a massive disincentive to aggressive warfare.
But combine the two modules together and you have the root-cause of many of the ills in the 0.0 game. I can understand why you are pro status quo on this issue Goumindong because you come from an organisation with a vast jump bridge network that holds space protected by cyno-jammers (that you would not be able to hold in their absense) but as a CSM delegate you need to learn to see the bigger picture and appreciate the future health of the game beyond your personal biased view of status quo maintenance.
Fortunately I'm pretty convinced that CCP are already convinced that 0.0 need to change urgently and there is limit to the damage you could do on the CSM panel - but its useful for the electorate to see your gut instinct on the sovereignty tool issue is to slightly move around the deckchairs on the Titanic rather than make an honest attempt to actually avoid the iceburg altogether.
Military experts are calling this a 'clueless rant'. -----------
|
Cadela Fria
Amarr x13 X13 Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.20 09:17:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Cadela Fria on 20/11/2008 09:18:08 I normally don't have a snipe at whatever CSM candidates feel like they want to do, it's their business, but I feel I just have to give my 2 cents here, sorry.
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah I would personally like to see Eve without alts, as people avoid consequences by using alts for criminal actions or as an anonymous income source for other activities.
Unrealistic as you said, it is entirely counter productive, business wise and community wise, to one way or the other force alts out of the game. If anyone, for any reason wish to have an alter ego as far as ingame characters go, they should be allowed to.
Since before 2008, I didn't have any alts whatsoever, but today I have 2..each one of them disconnected from the other 2 in terms of what they do, what corporation they are in, and only I, and a small handful of close friends know who they are, and I prefer to keep it that way.
No disrespect intended, but I will would a point out of opposing you and this idea if you ever tried to run with it. I want to keep my privacy thank you.
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
And I'd like to see Eve without smacktalkers and other childish people, and I suppose people that canbait noobs fall into that catagory as well.
Well, this one is a no brainer..will never happen in any shape or form, as you said, unrealistic.
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
But neither of the two are realistic, unfortunately.
*Blush* You know I wish I had read this before I started replying to the post, but to tell you the truth I had already written half this post before I noticed this little gold nugget, and so I figured I might as well finish the post
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
I agree with LaVista that jumpbridges are a plague in 0.0, and makes it too easy for large alliances to hold space without having vulnerable supply lines. It also invalidates small gang PVP.
Honestly the way I see it, if you have the finances, the resources, infrastructure and dedication, why shouldn't you have benefits like this? POS'es are a pain to maintain, and this is proportional to how many POS'es you have over large areas of space.
If you put in the effort, I say you deserve a little comfort imho.
Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah
Bah. I rather add things to Eve than remove things...
Wait..you're an EVE Player...and you want to ADD things as opposed to the usual "FIX STUFFZ BEFOAR U ADD MOAR!" crap???..I'm confused
|
Pixel SonursCreen
|
Posted - 2008.11.20 22:57:00 -
[18]
i would remove the solar system Jita from the game i think. |
Splagada
Minmatar Tides of Silence KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.21 21:09:00 -
[19]
"if i could"
id add a real mass and make objects "real". i want to crash in a station, and to dogfight in asteroids :p with asteroids/other ships shielding the opponent ammo. And i dont want a pod to bump a titan :S
oops that's a lot of if ------
Tides of Silence |
Issler Dainze
Minmatar Tadakastu-Obata Corporation The Honda Accord
|
Posted - 2008.11.21 21:54:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Pixel SonursCreen i would remove the solar system Jita from the game i think.
That was one of my first thoughts as well but then I realized we'd just have something "jitalike" pop up somewhere else. :-)
Issler |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |