| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Triumvirate.
    |
Posted - 2010.01.04 01:56:00 -
[1]
Simply put, remove any ability to set any standings at all. Everyone is simply either blue (in your alliance), green (in your corp) or neutral. 
Bye, bye to the 1000 vs. 1000 in one system garbage (ultra-blob warfare). Small alliances will actually have a chance to get into 0.0 without being forced to NAP either team A or team B.
Roaming in small gangs is viable again amongst other things that are deeply missed in the old days of EVE.
So before you rage flame this idea, just take a couple minutes to think about how the dynamics of 0.0 / low sec / empire would be like and if it would be better or worse than what we are experiencing now.
Side note:
What would 0.0 be like during the first week?
After a month?
6 months??
P.S. - Faction Warfare, well, not sure about how that would fit in but it would not get any worse for sure. 
 |
Endeva
Caldari
tr0pa de elite
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 02:04:00 -
[2]
who would be able to stop bob then:D
 |
Aloriana Jacques
Amarr
Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 02:58:00 -
[3]
As I understand it everyone is neutral to begin with and it is up to you to manipulate the standings. When you go to war they become red, when they become allies they become blue. Whether you adjust the neutrals to either side is up to you.
Once treaties are released (which got nudged out of Dominion) I think the more complicated bits of standings with Alliances should be eased at least in part.
- - -
Aloriana Jacques - Skill Sheet
 |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 03:21:00 -
[4]
This is a fundamentally dumb plan, and it will continue to be fundamentally dumb no matter how many people propose it. You can't stop people from having friends just by making the UI even less functional than it already is. You'll just make people memorize corp tickers, and maybe push alliances to merge. You won't change gameplay, you'll just annoy the crap out of everyone. No.
|
Yaay
UK Corp
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 03:27:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Marlona Sky
Simply put, remove any ability to set any standings at all. Everyone is simply either blue (in your alliance), green (in your corp) or neutral.
Bye, bye to the 1000 vs. 1000 in one system garbage (ultra-blob warfare). Small alliances will actually have a chance to get into 0.0 without being forced to NAP either team A or team B.
Roaming in small gangs is viable again amongst other things that are deeply missed in the old days of EVE.
So before you rage flame this idea, just take a couple minutes to think about how the dynamics of 0.0 / low sec / empire would be like and if it would be better or worse than what we are experiencing now.
Side note:
What would 0.0 be like during the first week?
After a month?
6 months??
P.S. - Faction Warfare, well, not sure about how that would fit in but it would not get any worse for sure.
didn't you and your boys laugh at my exact same proposal about 3 months ago?
DD changes
Docking PVP games |
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 04:46:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Aloriana Jacques
stuff
I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I should probably revise my OP a bit. 
Originally by: Yaay
stuff
If you did make a similar proposal link it. Maybe its better than mine.
Bottom line is CCP can only do so much with hardware to free up lag and such. Something else has got to give. Would this idea really be game breaking? Memorizing tickers? Be realistic guys. Something has got to change to get rid of this Team A vs. Team B only senario. EVE would only get vastly more enjoyable if this happened. "You can't stop people from becoming friends!" Forming a gang is nice.
All in all it comes down to either you are on the overview or you are not. Time to spice it up.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 06:39:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Yaay
you are obviously so narrow sighted as to not realize how good what you just said is for destroying super blobs.
Memorizing corp tickers works o so well currently when something odd happens and standings aren't set or bugged. Oh wait, that's right, people usually shoot first and then realize mistakes.
Merging alliances together wouldn't at all create political strife? Oh wait it would because the power hungry want power. The reason for so many smaller grouping of alliances is because it seperates ideals into finer details under similar types of leadership. Grouping those people together would create problems ultimately leading to breakoffs of that alliance that would ultimately create the same separation we see today. Which leads back to standings **** ups.
Ultimately, this leads to people refusing to blue so many ****ing people and instead put bullets in each others heads because it's just way easier.
Back in the good old days before standings, nobody like being allied outside of an alliance because it created constant standings issues. Many people choose either to stay away, or just form under one flag as a result. This lead to the wonderful leadership councils of FA, and Stain, and ASCN that worked out oh soo well. Just ask those old players how much they loved 5 hr meetings of 50 corp heads trying to all ***** about how much a pound really weighs.
Hey, I'm not an idiot. I know this will make stuff harder to run - probably not as much harder as you're suggesting, since I'd like to think that people can learn from the mistakes of their predecessors, but harder.
To put it bluntly, though, what effect it will have is secondary to me. Eve's user interface is frigging awful, and you're proposing to make it even worse. Am I the only one who thinks that's insane? You're trying to social engineer fifty thousand people by means of making this game even harder to play. You keep doing stuff like this, and you'll succeed at making blobs smaller, because people will quit playing instead of taking the **** you're trying to shovel onto them.
You've commanded big blobs before - what would your opinion have been if CCP's solution to big blobs was to eliminate the ability to warp between gang members, or to run gang warps? I hear that'd make big fleet movement next to impossible - that'd mean smaller blobs, right? Or how about it checks your computer to see if you have a voice chat program running, and logs you out of Eve if you do? What you're proposing is less invasive, but no less terrible an idea. You are trying to make the game harder to play for the specific purpose of forcing people not to play the way that they want. What sort of Bizarro World game design philosophy is that?
|
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 07:21:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Yaay
you are obviously... stuff
Hey, I'm not an... stuff
I guess you guys are referring to stuff that I was not all to familiar with from years ago that were issues resulting from there being no standings feature in the game. Granted some of these issues could apply now but the game has changed dramatically since then.
If removing standings would create more problems then how about using the same model of war dec fees and introduce them to standings. The more alliances/corps you blue with, the more expensive it becomes? Of course there would be that whole only shoot red people but maybe that aspect of standings could be changed.
Fixing the lag will not fix the current problem of ultra-power blocks in 0.0 NAP train A vs. NAP train B is just dumb. It does not allow any other alliances to enter 0.0 without joining either side. CCP and the CSM acknowledged that and Dominion was supposed to fix that. From what is happening, nothing has changed.
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 07:35:00 -
[9]
I highly doubt removing the standing list would solve it, it would just put more work on the diplomats of the big blocks. they still would bring the same numbers.
the chance was that the new sov system would lower this a bit, but i think allow to anchor the TCU next to a deathstar pos isnt really helping the cause.
maybe we should disallow this?
|
Cyberman Mastermind
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 07:48:00 -
[10]
Why not change the game so that anyone not in your corp/alliance gets automatically targetted, and the guns start to fire unless you manually stop them by entering a random 20 digit code?
THAT would prevent any "NAP-fest" pretty good, no?
I know I don't know that many multiplayer games, but I think Eve must be the only one where it is declared to be a problem if people are NOT constantly hostile to each other. |
|
Aineko Macx
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 11:46:00 -
[11]
LAWL 
no.
|
De'Veldrin
Minmatar
Special Projects Executive
The Obsidian Legion
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 12:45:00 -
[12]
For some reason, and I have yet to figure out why, this is one of those ideas that instead of being refined and made better every time it gets posted, actually gets worse. It's like a really crappy wine that only get nastier the longer it sits in the barrel.
Even if you completely removed standings from the game, players would still use them. They'd just find another way to manage them. Most likely some out of game website some intrepid pilot would throw together. Then instead of checking for a colored icon in game, they'd have to toss a name into a search screen and get a kill/no kill order. This doesn't strike you as making the game less enjoyable?
Also, despite your apparent "this only applies to nullsec people anyway" approach, people in high sec do use standings as well.
I can appreciate your frustration about the lag in nullsec, but this isn't the way to fix it. I'm not even sure it would help the way you think it would. I have a feeling it would make the blobs bigger, since people would want to make sure they're surrounded by people they can, if not trust, then at least feel comfortable they won't accidentally shoot them in the midst of a fight.
--Vel
Brand new year, same old attitude. |
Drake Draconis
Minmatar
Shadow Cadre
Looney Toons.
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 15:50:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Drake Draconis on 04/01/2010 15:52:05
As its already been pointed out... removing standings is a waste of time as it would result in more frustrating forms of communication and relations.
Just because someone is blue to me doesn't mean they can't shoot me or I can't shoot them.
Even then your likely going to get a ton of complaints and various whines over it... so this is a big fat troll IMHO.
=========================
CEO of Shadow Cadre
http://www.shadowcadre.com
========================= |
Marlona Sky
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 22:23:00 -
[14]
*sigh*
I guess no one likes the idea of a 0.0 without NAP Trains and laggy fleet fights.
This particular stab at trying to fix that may not be a good idea but I don't see anyone else proposing anything besides, "It's all CCP's fault! CSM you need to intervene... somehow..." emo threads.
|
Herty
The Sexy Carebear Boredom Convention
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 22:56:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Marlona Sky
*sigh*
I guess no one likes the idea of a 0.0 without NAP Trains and laggy fleet fights.
This particular stab at trying to fix that may not be a good idea but I don't see anyone else proposing anything besides, "It's all CCP's fault! CSM you need to intervene... somehow..." emo threads.
How many blues does tri have?
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
|
Posted - 2010.01.04 23:19:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Marlona Sky
*sigh*
I guess no one likes the idea of a 0.0 without NAP Trains and laggy fleet fights.
This particular stab at trying to fix that may not be a good idea but I don't see anyone else proposing anything besides, "It's all CCP's fault! CSM you need to intervene... somehow..." emo threads.
It has nothing to do with whether I like or dislike it, any more than my opinion regarding a dictatorship of the proletariat does. You can't get there from here. Stop trying. Spend your effort on something that can work - solutions like node reinforcement, general server code improvements, and placing a high priority on fixing bugs like the one leading to the recent lag. Those will do much more for fleet fights than any sort of hare-brained scheme to balance the game by cranking up player annoyance. It'll work about as well as the attempts to balance POS sovereignty the same way - you won't stop the behaviour, you'll just make your most dedicated players despise you.
|
Marconus Orion
D00M.
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 05:37:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Marconus Orion on 14/01/2010 05:37:44
Hell yeah! pew pew and stuff. 
 |
Kassa Daito
Capital Construction Research
|
Posted - 2010.01.14 21:24:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind
I know I don't know that many multiplayer games, but I think Eve must be the only one where it is declared to be a problem if people are NOT constantly hostile to each other.
Interesting concept. I'd say it's more along the lines of being a problem if too many people are not hostile to each other. For some time, there have been around 6 massive power blocks in nullsec controlling the vast majority of space so efficiently that relatively few new groups ever manage to move into nullsec without becoming a member of a nearby NAP powerblock.
If everyone in EVE somehow managed to "just get along" then we'd have nothing but essentially Empire space and it'd be just as boring running your 5,000th Worlds Collide in NPC 0.0 as it was in Motsu.
I'm not sure if this is the way to stop the alliance blobbing (nothing will stop fleet blobbing) but alliance blobbing is reducing the ability for new groups to get starterd in the more dangerous areas because they're so much more dangerous for those new people than the already NAP'd giants.
**
Disclaimer: Author sometimes spell checks but is not responsible for sins of commission, omission, emission, transmission, or submission. Flowers, bricks, or any other form of feedback appreciated |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |