Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 31 post(s) |
Suzzana Z
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:22:00 -
[1621]
Is it CCCP the new owner of CCP or are CCP a former CCCP Officer
You are so stupid in your new ide off 0.0 living
|
Mastertz
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:22:00 -
[1622]
Originally by: Bagehi
Originally by: Carcusian So you'll have to actually take one gate to get to your next jump bridge?
O the horror.
Changes like this are long overdue.
Now let's see cool-own periods on capital jump drives as well, and maybe we'll continue to get rid of instant-mega-fleets all over the damn map.
Somebody said this change is the end game that kills pvp. Been hearing that since '05. It wasn't true then, won't be true now.
GG CCP.
Big fleets aren't instant. They take several days notice and several hours to form. They also don't get from point A to B all that fast. If they are going across the map, that is usually a multi-day affair simply because everyone isn't online at the same time, so multiple smaller fleets have to form and move individually. It only looks instant to people who are horrible at Eve and don't have spies. The "omg, this fleet just showed up out of no where!!!11" crowd will still complain about "instant fleets" without JBs.
This is why you lost all your space. lol.
|
IskPlease
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:25:00 -
[1623]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Needa3 Now put the jump bridges near a gate or on a planet instead of a pos so they cant go hide in the safety of a pos.
Still don't get why it is so hard to remove the damn things.
Before they were there every alliance managed to its logistics just fine. Now people don't even now how to fly through a gate. It seems like "jump bridge in game" = "no brains needed outside game"
If you ask me, those things should never have made it into the game anyway.
so, when do we get destructible stations or station ping pong? it is time Eve starts getting rid of the "easy mode"
Well then at least we can agree on removing unprobable ships from the game, no more easy mode.
No disagreement there. I'm pretty sure you'll get your wish too :)
Hide your tengus, hide your LP, coz they'r nerfin' everybody out here!
|
Iece Quaan
Caldari Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:28:00 -
[1624]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Zamiq
Again, you have not told us why this change will increase the chances of this non-consensual pvp that you keep talking about. I mean the people with an intel channel and a JB will stay as people with an intel channel and a JB and it does not take a genius to figure out that if a roaming gang has been spotted 3 jumps away from a JB location then its not safe to go there.
It increases traffic in areas that are more accessible to players outside your alliance. It's a given that a POS with guns, shields and a jumpbridge to another friendly POS is inherently safer than a stargate. While it's certainly possible to kill people at POSs, it's a bit more complex than just roaming around, killing people in open space.
Ignorance. PVP anyplace in eve, not just in 0.0, depends far more on your knowledge of and ability to manipulate session timers, immunity timers, and aggression mechanics than the simple fact that a JB exists.
This will change nothing; those of us skilled at avoiding ( or forcing ) pvp will see no change other than the amount of time it takes to get from point A to point B. The only thing you've done is make day-to-day logistics even more of a soul-crushing grind than it already is.
If you want MOAR PVP then you need to take a serious look at the way aggression and interdiction mechanics work. It is, and always has been, absolutely trivial to avoid fights. The general idea that you need to patrol your own space in order to keep it secure is sound; the problem is that you can never, ever remove six dudes who camp gates with off-grid bookmarks and improved cloaks. And you've just given them double the number of points to afk camp. Asymmetrical conflict should be possible, but what's the point of holding sov space if it doesn't give you any benefits?
|
Sirus Prime
Caldari Xero Corporation SpaceMonkey's Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:32:00 -
[1625]
Originally by: Night Epoch One JB per system? I expect a threadnaught.
EMBRACE THE THREADNAUGHT OF OUR RAGE CCP!!! QUIT F**KING UP MY GAME EXPERIENCE!!!
/rage
|
Kalissa
Sacred Templars RED.OverLord
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:34:00 -
[1626]
All these tears do indeed make my day, all the crying about having to take risks and how smaller alliances will be hit when actually since smaller alliances own less space and have less JB's they will be hit less. Life out in 0.0 is supposed to be risky, for too long people have had it too easy.
Yes there will be gatecamps, so bloody well deal with it thats what PVP is about and in the end PVP is what makes EVE tick without that everything falls apart for everyone.
I personally will be hit by this moving around won't be as convenient or risk free as it is now but as I've said in a previous post this idea is well overdue, good on you CCP!
(And looking back at previous posts it does seem like most of the bleating is coming from the NC doesn't it? That gives me a nice warm feeling inside )
|
Dodgy Past
Amarr Zor Industries Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:45:00 -
[1627]
Edited by: Dodgy Past on 11/05/2011 17:47:40
Originally by: Bagehi Big fleets aren't instant. They take several days notice and several hours to form. They also don't get from point A to B all that fast. If they are going across the map, that is usually a multi-day affair simply because everyone isn't online at the same time, so multiple smaller fleets have to form and move individually. It only looks instant to people who are horrible at Eve and don't have spies. The "omg, this fleet just showed up out of no where!!!11" crowd will still complain about "instant fleets" without JBs.
Really.
Maybe you should focus on being less awful at the game.
The issue is that NC is terrible, because the alliances in it are terrible, because the corps in them are terrible because they allow an terrible trash members in.
Sadly there is this culture that numbers are everything and everyone of those people is a delicate flower that has to be praised like a spoilt child just for turning up to a CTA.
Why should CCP ruin the game for everyone else just to cater to pacifistic self entitled trash.
|
Cellistara
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:47:00 -
[1628]
Originally by: Dodgy Past
Originally by: Bagehi Big fleets aren't instant. They take several days notice and several hours to form. They also don't get from point A to B all that fast. If they are going across the map, that is usually a multi-day affair simply because everyone isn't online at the same time, so multiple smaller fleets have to form and move individually. It only looks instant to people who are horrible at Eve and don't have spies. The "omg, this fleet just showed up out of no where!!!11" crowd will still complain about "instant fleets" without JBs.
Really.
Maybe you should focus on being less awful at the game.
The issue is that NC is terrible, because the alliances in it are terrible, because the corps in them are terrible because they allow an terrible trash members in.
Sadly there is this culture that numbers are everything and everyone of those people is a delicate flower that has to be praised like a spoilt child just for turning up to a CTA.
Because you need 500 subcaps to deal with your 400 man super/titan blobs. Cant really complain when its you guys who are shaping numbers and fleet comp.
|
Tamahra
Gallente Apina.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:47:00 -
[1629]
Take strategy games: What makes territorial conflicts interesting is when there are several borders to be defended. But if you can move your troops in no time to any border, then there is effectively only one border that you have to defend, and then a conflict gets static and/or uninteresting. Thats what we mostly have in Eve right now, and it seems CCP is going to change that to the better.
|
Iece Quaan
Caldari Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:49:00 -
[1630]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: Purrp Ledone
Originally by: Weaselior
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
I think we're doing this in terms of longer scale development, at least to some extent. We're developing the plan, which we'll share with the CSM this month, and hopefully we'll be able to show the players shortly after that.
This is an isolated change that has been slated to happen for a while.
seriously why wasn't "removing guns from JB pos" considered since it's stupid easy to do, does a better job than your proposal, and doesn't increase tedium
CCP Soundwave, can you elaborate on whether this option was considered, and if so, why it was rejected?
A wide range of options were considered, among those, different levels of guns on the POS. Everything from changing the fitting requirements to stripping them entirely. At the end of the day, I'm not entirely thrilled about basing smaller scale pvp around POSs. I really like the idea of having it out on the open, at a "neutral" structure like gates. It's much more visible than having to track down a POS that will still give your opponent an advantage.
Are you ****ing serious? TIL a static structure in space, that I have to fuel using vulnerable and powerless ships, and is itself vulnerable to destruction, shouldn't give me any kind of ingame advantage- even when paired with modules that you need to own SOV to deploy.
Please, fire yourself.
|
|
Dodgy Past
Amarr Zor Industries Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:49:00 -
[1631]
Originally by: Cellistara Because you need 500 subcaps to deal with your 400 man super/titan blobs. Cant really complain when its you guys who are shaping numbers and fleet comp.
Where did those trillions from moon goo go? Why were all the SCs / Titans sold rather than used in house. Where did all that isk go
|
Cailais
Amarr Dawn of a new Empire The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:50:00 -
[1632]
My initial thoughts I've added to my latest blog post (here).
tl;dr version is its not a simple black and white issue to what extent jump bridges aid, or hinder conflict within null sec.
C.
the hydrostatic capsule blog
|
Yeep
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:54:00 -
[1633]
Originally by: Dodgy Past
The issue is that NC is terrible, because the alliances in it are terrible, because the corps in them are terrible because they allow an terrible trash members in.
And PL is basically full of trust fund babies who can't understand why people are upset the public library is closing to make room for a polo field because daddy has a whole room full of books and you can totally play polo. Oh you don't have a horse? I guess you can play on foot but I'm still going to use the horse daddy bought me.
See, I can do personal insults too.
|
Infinion
Caldari Awesome Corp
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:58:00 -
[1634]
Edited by: Infinion on 11/05/2011 18:00:06 Increasing the chances of pvp by nerfing jump bridges is fine, but maybe that's not exactly what is needed to make pvp fresh again and more frequent. Maybe it's time to look at things that will arouse more interest in roaming for a fight.
-Is there a problem with the stargate model we have in eve? Is it fine to have stargates as the most obvious and most frequent place for a pvp encounter or should it occur in more places?
-What about looking into tactics? The concept for fleet formations has been around for ages and still has been untouched. It could be a great improvement to a better pvp experience; maybe people will roam as an excuse to look at a cool formation?
-What about the idea ccp had to target a ship's subsystems like engines, weapon systems, shields, and then the hull itself? Maybe the whole shield/armor/hull hp of every ship is too simplified and starting to age in our combat system? Why should a ship that is under fire only last for 15 seconds before exploding? Does it need to be that short for it to be scalable in large scale combat? Why does it need to be scalable? Would lengthening the time it takes to kill a ship if you don't target subsystems make losing your ship more fulfilling? What is time worth and why should most of that time be spent making money versus fighting? Would taking longer to die constitute more regret or satisfaction when you think about what it took to earn that ship?
If it's currently so easy to avoid a pvp encounter doesn't it raise the question of why it's being avoided and whether fights still offer a quality pvp experience or not? Has pvp become sort of predictable and bland tasting?
why is it that over the past 8 years we have been contempt with just adding more ships to the game instead of evolving the core aspects of pvp?
|
Feyleaf
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:59:00 -
[1635]
Edited by: Feyleaf on 11/05/2011 18:02:50 To be fair. PL is a very narrow one sided alliance.
Very few ppl here seem to have an oppinion or care whats good for the game.. only whats good for their own current playstyle. I guesss thats natural.
Sad to see delusional devs like soundwave trying to ruin their own game. and im not just talking about his 7day(omfg) change.
The only thing i can think of is: 1 account = 1 vote.. cancel alt+state reason, only vote you have.
|
Di Mulle
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:01:00 -
[1636]
Now CCP did an experiment and we got just a small glimpse of what would happen if they ever touch L4's
On a serious note, while the change sounds not bad, the not complex approach to 0.0 and game in overall problems seems horrible. "We will sit over 0.0 somewhere around the winter, soon tm blah blah" - nah, not going to work.
|
Cellistara
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:03:00 -
[1637]
Originally by: Dodgy Past
Originally by: Cellistara Because you need 500 subcaps to deal with your 400 man super/titan blobs. Cant really complain when its you guys who are shaping numbers and fleet comp.
Where did those trillions from moon goo go? Why were all the SCs / Titans sold rather than used in house. Where did all that isk go
Because sov costs isk. Building Ihub and upgrading them costs ****tons of isk, managing towers costs isk, jumpbridges cost lots of isk, CSAAs cost more isk, subcap reimbursments cost isk, cap reimbursments cost isk, fun costs isk, and with what little is left over from that goes to maybe helping people get a supercap, or it goes to getting a titan for bridging. Everything costs isk, ya know, unless you live in npc 0.0 and cheaters throw billions of isk and supers at you by the truck load.
|
Major Stallion
The Dark Horses.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:05:00 -
[1638]
Originally by: Cedori
Conventional Fleets can down cynojammers (and cynogens) pretty easily already, but this would give an advantage to "owning space" on the defensive side.
ahhhhhhhhhh hahahahahaha lmao, right
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:10:00 -
[1639]
Edited by: Bagehi on 11/05/2011 18:12:18
Originally by: Messy Beaver
Originally by: Bagehi The power blocs are not responsible. They are the optimal solution for the current game mechanics. CCP needs to fix the game mechanics, this doesn't do it.
You think the player base has no responsibility in changes CCP makes to the game?
The players asked for a more all round space simulation(cant remember back that far?).......CCP gives you Incarna walking in stations
Player base asked for a change to the pos sov system.......CCP gives you the horrendous system we have today
Player base asked for customisable ships.......CCP gave you T3 cruisers
Don't think that the bears whining about travel times gave us JB's, warp to 0 etc?
The power blocs shaped this game so that small roams, smaller scale pvp became the preverbial ugly bird in a bar, only attractive when looked through beer goggles or to those with a fetish for it.
My point in this horrible post? The players have shaped this game just as much as CCP have. Take a look at your own playstyle before crying to CCP asking for changes.
If I recall correctly, Incarna was promised years ago and put on the back burner. That and flying on planets. CCP pulled Incarna off the shelf when they picked up the WoD IP as a way to test their code before going live with the WoD MMO. Perhaps you remember that differently.
Players have been asking for POS mechanics to be changed. Instead of changing them, CCP built a new sov mechanic that was not as centered on them. Honestly, not that bad compared to how it used to be, but still not what the players had asked for.
Players asked for customizable ships, CCP delivered. No problems there.
JB's were given because people started asking "why hold sov?" Then CCP made a bigger isk sink out of it and people asked "why hold sov?" and we got the anoms. Now CCP is taking the carrots back and hoping people forgot the questions that led to those being introduced. Why hold sov? Why pay for sov? You really only need it for a few systems were you want the use of stations and a the deep neg null sec systems that you get good anoms from. The rest of the systems are just filler that no one wants.
The mechanics of the game and the desire of CCP to populate null sec is why the population density in null has skyrocketed and why small scale null warfare has diminished.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
Komen
Gallente The Night Crew
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:13:00 -
[1640]
What is it with CCP and the middle of the year? Last year it was '18 months, etc.' and now this, with a very split player base. As an outsider, the fact that this basically is split right down the line on 'people who use JB's are against', 'people who don't are for' (mostly, I know there are a few exceptions but the vast majority, you can predict their support or antagonism by which bloc they belong to) is interesting to watch. I would hope that some compromise solution could be had, and that CCP is willing to listen to alternatives. It's interesting that those who are against this have themselves proposed a nerf to their major source of income. Also, the leader of the CSM will be solidly in the 'against' block, so we'll see how that turns out.
Ah, Eve development as spectator sport. So glad I still hang around.
|
|
erikjan86
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:13:00 -
[1641]
dont mess with the jb's its alliance space and if youre invading it and want space, take a fight for it and don't get in tears and complain by ccp about the jb network. and if this is going to hapen i think alot of people will stop playing eve online its makes **** of 0.0
|
Enthral
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:18:00 -
[1642]
Originally by: Tamahra Take strategy games: What makes territorial conflicts interesting is when there are several borders to be defended. But if you can move your troops in no time to any border, then there is effectively only one border that you have to defend, and then a conflict gets static and/or uninteresting. Thats what we mostly have in Eve right now, and it seems CCP is going to change that to the better.
And you would be right, if you could "assign" people to sit on a border for days or weeks on end, 24 hours per day, waiting for conflict. With real people, it simply doesn't work that way. Changing the JB mechanics actually waters down whatever little strategy exists in alliance warfare, and it sure makes daily logistics nasty. It will also have the opposite effect CCP thinks it will, as people will be unwilling to travel for 20 minutes just to address small roaming gangs passing through.
|
speedek
Spricer WE FORM VOLTRON
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:21:00 -
[1643]
CCP honestly: ♥
|
Tamahra
Gallente Apina.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:29:00 -
[1644]
Edited by: Tamahra on 11/05/2011 18:30:37
Originally by: Enthral
Originally by: Tamahra Take strategy games: What makes territorial conflicts interesting is when there are several borders to be defended. But if you can move your troops in no time to any border, then there is effectively only one border that you have to defend, and then a conflict gets static and/or uninteresting. Thats what we mostly have in Eve right now, and it seems CCP is going to change that to the better.
And you would be right, if you could "assign" people to sit on a border for days or weeks on end, 24 hours per day, waiting for conflict. With real people, it simply doesn't work that way. Changing the JB mechanics actually waters down whatever little strategy exists in alliance warfare, and it sure makes daily logistics nasty. It will also have the opposite effect CCP thinks it will, as people will be unwilling to travel for 20 minutes just to address small roaming gangs passing through.
Im going through your arguments, one by one:
And you would be right, if you could "assign" people to sit on a border for days or weeks on end, 24 hours per day, waiting for conflict. With real people, it simply doesn't work that way.
People won¦t sit on a border for days or weeks 24 hours per day, waiting for conflict, that¦s right. And that¦s exactly what opens up opportunities for attacking forces. The bigger the territory of the defender, the more opportunities for attackers arise. Do you see, where im going with this? I believe the changes will make Eve alot more dynamic.
Changing the JB mechanics actually waters down whatever little strategy exists in alliance warfare
Why?
And it sure makes daily logistics nasty.
It will make logistics more difficult, the larger the territory is that you own. Which again opens up opportunities for smaller entities to make the live of a huge alliance blob harder, in my opinion at least.
It will also have the opposite effect CCP thinks it will, as people will be unwilling to travel for 20 minutes just to address small roaming gangs passing through.
Those who are willing, will prevail over those who are not willing. It¦s that simple, really.
|
Infinion
Caldari Awesome Corp
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:30:00 -
[1645]
Edited by: Infinion on 11/05/2011 18:32:26
Originally by: Cellistara
Originally by: Dodgy Past
Originally by: Cellistara Because you need 500 subcaps to deal with your 400 man super/titan blobs. Cant really complain when its you guys who are shaping numbers and fleet comp.
Where did those trillions from moon goo go? Why were all the SCs / Titans sold rather than used in house. Where did all that isk go
Because sov costs isk. Building Ihub and upgrading them costs ****tons of isk, managing towers costs isk, jumpbridges cost lots of isk, CSAAs cost more isk, subcap reimbursments cost isk, cap reimbursments cost isk, fun costs isk, and with what little is left over from that goes to maybe helping people get a supercap, or it goes to getting a titan for bridging. Everything costs isk, ya know, unless you live in npc 0.0 and cheaters throw billions of isk and supers at you by the truck load.
so my question is why do isk faucets and isk sinks have to balance out and why is the cost of fun so short lived? Why do we spend so much time grinding for hours earning isk instead of just constantly losing ships? Exactly how important is value to us and is it worth our time? If it's easy to make money, money wont be so important and less time will be spent trying to make it. Why do you think people don't patrol their space like in all the cool expansions? Because it's not worth their time, they would rather be making isk so they can afford to fly capable ships and afford to take part in pvp more often. Who would care if wealth is amassed or not? If you constantly commit yourself to making isk you will inevitably participate less in pvp. Why do we need a real-world economic model?
There's obviously a balance between both making money and pvp but the way i see it right now, it is out of balance and leaning towards the average pilot spending most of their time grinding for isk.
edit: and that's a couple of reasons so many people avoid pvp and use jump bridges because either they feel its not worth their time or they can't afford it
|
Mara Tessidar
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:36:00 -
[1646]
My group's response to this has been "Let's go take over the nearby region of NPC nullsec, because now it's better than where we currently live!"
Brilliant thinking, CCP. I love how you anticipated all the consequences of this rapidly-implemented and well thought out "update." Signature locked and removed. Zymurgist |
ShadowFire15
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:40:00 -
[1647]
I'm not saying that we can't adapt to these changes cause I'm sure we will, but the timing and complete urgency of this change just doesn't make sense. I for one never had a problem with using stargates.
Also, I don't know why people are hating on the NC specifically so much. EVE is suppose to be a sandbox, but people seem mad of how the NC decided to play this game. Yeah we have our jb network and it helps to move around large distances, but we also pay billions a month to have them up. Also, if we hold sov, pay for this sov, and provide protection ourselves, shouldn't we be allowed to have the perks of nullsec. People seem upset that some people actually enjoy pve'ing for their isk and that's them. Doesn't mean you have to insult them for it.
CCP was all for boosting living in nullsec with the upgrades to sov and now they seem to be slowly taking it all back. When you get use to having something and someone just up and takes it away of course people are going to rage.
Also, to everyone saying to go back to the way things were, I have nothing to say against that, but why is everyone saying that people managed just fine without all the perks and stuff. In RL, people are constantly trying to find better ways of doing things. A way you can do things faster and are more convient. What you are saying is like saying that sure back in the day we managed to do just fine hunting with bows and arrows or whatever to get our food and relying on a campfire of sorts to stay warm. And now we got heat and air condition inside and a store to get our food and you complain about it and say it was better of how it use to be?
My problem with this is not just because of the JB changes but it seems that CCP is desperate to stop the way some alliances have lived in nullsec for quite a long time. Anom nerf for the average player to support their pvp and other stuff well. Now a nerf to JB's. With this pattern, it seems like it's only going downhill. Anyway, thought I'd go ahead and put my post in. Chuck Norris has the largest fleet of supercaps in the EVE universe. **** him off and he will use them to literally erase you from existence. And people wonder why they can't remember little tommy. |
ELECTR0FREAK
Eye of God United Front Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:41:00 -
[1648]
Originally by: Dodgy Past Edited by: Dodgy Past on 11/05/2011 17:47:40
Originally by: Bagehi Big fleets aren't instant. They take several days notice and several hours to form. They also don't get from point A to B all that fast. If they are going across the map, that is usually a multi-day affair simply because everyone isn't online at the same time, so multiple smaller fleets have to form and move individually. It only looks instant to people who are horrible at Eve and don't have spies. The "omg, this fleet just showed up out of no where!!!11" crowd will still complain about "instant fleets" without JBs.
Really.
Maybe you should focus on being less awful at the game.
The issue is that NC is terrible, because the alliances in it are terrible, because the corps in them are terrible because they allow an terrible trash members in.
Sadly there is this culture that numbers are everything and everyone of those people is a delicate flower that has to be praised like a spoilt child just for turning up to a CTA.
Why should CCP ruin the game for everyone else just to cater to pacifistic self entitled trash.
I'll bet your internet spaceships make you feel important, don't they?
Discoverer of the Original Missile Damage Formula |
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:41:00 -
[1649]
Originally by: Infinion There's obviously a balance between both making money and pvp but the way i see it right now, it is out of balance and leaning towards the average pilot spending most of their time grinding for isk.
I take the opposite approach: The pilot who spends a lot of time grinding isk is flying ships far more expensive than they should be flying.
Don't make much money, don't want to grind isk? Don't complain. Fly frigates and cruisers with T1 gear. You can still be effective in a fight and you don't have to worry about blowing up because it's cheap. There's a ton of frigates that can be bought and fit for under a million isk and still contribute meaningfully to a fight.
That's what I do and I'm quite happy. I still have some shiny expensive ships with nice mods, but they're for special occasions or for solo work where skill and shiny, more than numbers, actually matters.
- "When I nerf something, it takes 2-3 months for your dreams to be crushed." - CCP Big Dumb Object |
Bloodhands
Navy of Xoc Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2011.05.11 18:43:00 -
[1650]
Edited by: Bloodhands on 11/05/2011 18:43:53 My original question still stands. If this change is not a politically or monetarily driven change, what would be the harm in pushing back the release date of Phase One until say 14 June, 2011 (34 days) and Phase Two until four weeks after?
A time line change would give the political players who are currently involved in the largest war the Eve Online universe has ever seen a chance to adjust their tactics thus not end up appearing as if CCP is attempting to interfere with the political landscape of negative security space, which is what this looks like to the majority of the readers and posters in this thread.
I am an odd person, speaking as a long time null sec logistics director who has been playing and leading his respective corporations/alliances logistics since before titans, before warp to 0 and before the goons were known as goons. I don't see this change as a bad thing. Will it make logistics more difficult? possibly. Can we adapt? defiantly.
You keep on talking about how PvP in sovereign space is only brought about lately on a sovereignty warfare basis and you think this is bad. Why not boost low security space's rewards for small gang movements. Small gang warfare is what low security space is there for and nation building / conquering is what sovereign space is for.
Should there also be small scale fights in sovereign space? Sure! But not by mandating the game be played your way and no other. Give us the ability to shoot our friends. Give us regional or constellation settings. We all want to be friends to protect our space, but we REALLY hate each other and want to kill each other with out effecting that ability to protect our space.
Take fade and pure blind for example. 12 alliances control small bits of space here so we are all forced to work together in our space. Now, what about when we see each other in Fountain or Venal? There is nothing more we would love then to kill each other, but due to current game mechanics we can not. Give us that ability and i can guarantee you that small scale PvP in sovereign space will increase greatly.
______________________
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 75 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |