Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2772
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:39:00 -
[301] - Quote
Jouron wrote:TLDR: 1. The new log off timer is just ugly and could be implemented in a more stream lined way. 2. Persistence mechanics were fine the way they were they just needed better explanation to new players 3. Safety is an interesting idea from a simulator stand point, and just because can/mission baiting is dead doesn't mean all forms of non invited pvp are dead. Text wall apologies all around.
"Happy Safe Fun time!" Probably not the best title for this blog considering how much negative fire its drawn, people hear that name and they automatically think: "Hello kitty Online."
Honestly I dont think any of the devs behind this are "idiots or fools" I just have to say that the giant timer, was a little much. I mean when I saw how much real estate It took up on the screen. It was almost comical.
1. Now changes that make eve more inviting to new players could be helpful because it means theres more new players to pew. But changes that are too hand holdy seem slightly counter productive to the whole EVE is hard image. The timer is just too in your face. For crime watch you have these great little timers and sound effects for keeping track of flags, why couldn't that have been used instead of this giant bulky interrupting counter that pops up on your screen. Why not just have some kind of top left hand counter that would slowly tick down to a green check mark and then when you mouse over it it would simply state:"Clear to log off safely" or something along the lines of that.
2. I have never had a problem with the log off timer being a minute. Honestly other then bot ratters in nullsec I dont think any one has had a problem with that. The first time I got killed when I was logged off aggressed was a shock, but once It was explained it made sense. I dont think you need to mess with current persistence mechanics I just think you needed to explain the current ones better to new players.
Now for the safety button at first i thought it was cool because Im a big fan of realistic flight simulators like F18 super hornet etc, games where if your joystick has a safety you actually have to disengage it if you want any of your weapons to go hot. Simulator wise I liked the idea of it. The lack of explanation in eve meant people who did there homework had an advantage. Knowledge was power. So can flipping would be dead essentially, or tricking mission runners would be dead as long as they never touched the little green button. Un complicating aggression did seem a very Un EVE thing to do. You should always be able to gank some one if that gets your jollies off, but at the same time, some one shouldn't die because they didn't dig through the forums on day one to read some archaic rule regarding agression mechanics.
When I brought up some of the concerns i read on this forum about the safety with a friend he simply asked: "Can I still gank some one in high sec?" "Yes," "So the other players safety doesn't stop me from ganking them even if its on?" "Right" " Then why would I care?"
Its going to be very easy to pick up a suspect flag come the 4th. If you think no one will be flagged because there too afraid of getting blobbed I think you'll be surprised. Will you be able to 'trick' people. No. But honestly I feel thats a leveling of the playing field. If a random person flying by is flagged people may just decide,"What the hell Ill go for it," and still end up dying any ways the same way they would if they saw some one goes red next to there can or mission.
3. It may be more costly but we can still gank people in high sec, so no, just because mission and can baiting is gone doesn't mean all forms of that kind of pvp in high sec is dead. With the bounty system people like goons may just start putting bounties on miners directly to encourage there ganking and to make it profitable. People will just have to learn how to get fights with the new system. It doesn't mean those same fights just will cease to exist. We claim were more clever then people who dont read the rules. On dec 4th we'll have to prove it when rubber meets the road. It will be more about being a pool hustler, and less about being a lawyer. You cant win every case because of sub section b clause a any longer. You have to make people think they can beat you when they dont have a chance. Its eve. How hard is that? In both those situations you used miss direction to win. 1: The timer is big because you will not be interacting with anything until the timer is done (unless in an emergency like being probed out and agressed). Once you click "safe log off" you don't touch anything else.
2: Persistance mechanics had some major flaws that were easily exploitable by bots, among other things. Being able to be agressed during the log off timer fixed a lot of those, but it needed the balance of a shorter timer when using that option. I think that we will find that most people that log off in a panic will still hit ctrl+q, and quite likely end up dying.
3: Pretty much agree. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Terrorfrodo
GNADE Inc.
245
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:41:00 -
[302] - Quote
It will be quite hard to forget that your safety is enabled. Not only is there this shining green light, also your weapons are highlighted in red to show you that you cannot fire them under your current safety setting. This is quite hard to miss.
Yes, the safety setting needs to be made persistent. But the amount of rage flowing through this thread is totally exaggerated and it is quite clear that this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills.
Which isn't even true with the new pve combat flag and the ability to create pvp flags for pilots after they have logged off.
Seriously, non-consensual pvp is getting BUFFED, and all you people can do is predict doom and gloom . |
SB Rico
the united Negative Ten.
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:46:00 -
[303] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:It will be quite hard to forget that your safety is enabled. Not only is there this shining green light, also your weapons are highlighted in red to show you that you cannot fire them under your current safety setting. This is quite hard to miss. Yes, the safety setting needs to be made persistent. But the amount of rage flowing through this thread is totally exaggerated and it is quite clear that this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills. Which isn't even true with the new pve combat flag and the ability to create pvp flags for pilots after they have logged off. Seriously, non-consensual pvp is getting BUFFED, and all you people can do is predict doom and gloom
It is the idea that this is being forced down my throat that annoys me especially as the only people who need it are the people who can't read a box that says, I paraphrase,
If you continue with this action you will be blown into small pieces and your ashes will be scattered across space... Are you sure you want to do this.
Oh wait I don't see that message cos I turned it off 3 years ago.
As for safety itself messing with my kills, if I can turn mine off for good it would have absolutely no damn effect on them.
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2772
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:46:00 -
[304] - Quote
SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:ANGRY23 wrote:I'm still waiting on valid reason from dev's from this team for implementing this unfinished product that isnt persistant and cant be set to default red/off. This shouldnt be force fed to low sec or null sec players if it cant like everything else in the client be customisable by the user and remembered when i log off. Every other team has been making changes based on customer feedback from testing and forum posts and have listened to feedback from us, so far i see devs only replying to questions regarding parts of this blog people arent whining about. Lots of cool stuff coming on tuesday and this just puts a massive smudge on the icing of an otherwise decent expansion.
Have it remember our prefences or dont add it till it can. 1: Yes, it should be made persistant as soon as feasable, preferably in the point release that will follow shortly after the main release (since everything is feature locked at this point). 2: It would be incredibly stupid to make the default of a safety to be the "Off" position. Anything else would be extremely counter intuitive and user unfriendly. Don't undermine the only valid point you have. 3: How many alts are you going to post in this thread with. So far I count 2... or is it 3 now? Corpmates agreeing with him, yes but he has posted on no alts tyvm. Oh and for a pirate setting the default to green/on is a pretty stupid idea which is why Angry is asking that we all as players have the ability to choose the default setting for our own needs.
Sure, sure, no alts involved. Whatever you say.
As I said, I too am in favor of making the players choice of default preference persistant... but until we have that making the safety default to Green is the only sensible choice. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
SB Rico
the united Negative Ten.
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:49:00 -
[305] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:ANGRY23 wrote:I'm still waiting on valid reason from dev's from this team for implementing this unfinished product that isnt persistant and cant be set to default red/off. This shouldnt be force fed to low sec or null sec players if it cant like everything else in the client be customisable by the user and remembered when i log off. Every other team has been making changes based on customer feedback from testing and forum posts and have listened to feedback from us, so far i see devs only replying to questions regarding parts of this blog people arent whining about. Lots of cool stuff coming on tuesday and this just puts a massive smudge on the icing of an otherwise decent expansion.
Have it remember our prefences or dont add it till it can. 1: Yes, it should be made persistant as soon as feasable, preferably in the point release that will follow shortly after the main release (since everything is feature locked at this point). 2: It would be incredibly stupid to make the default of a safety to be the "Off" position. Anything else would be extremely counter intuitive and user unfriendly. Don't undermine the only valid point you have. 3: How many alts are you going to post in this thread with. So far I count 2... or is it 3 now? Corpmates agreeing with him, yes but he has posted on no alts tyvm. Oh and for a pirate setting the default to green/on is a pretty stupid idea which is why Angry is asking that we all as players have the ability to choose the default setting for our own needs. Sure, sure, no alts involved. Whatever you say. As I said, I too am in favor of making the players choice of default preference persistant... but until we have that making the safety default to Green is the only sensible choice.
Who cares what the initial setting is, we sure as hell don't, all we want is to log on when it goes live, turn it off and forget about it.
Oh and to help some people like Angry don't fly in corps containing only their alts they have others who will follow them :)
|
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2772
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 16:53:00 -
[306] - Quote
SB Rico wrote:Terrorfrodo wrote:It will be quite hard to forget that your safety is enabled. Not only is there this shining green light, also your weapons are highlighted in red to show you that you cannot fire them under your current safety setting. This is quite hard to miss. Yes, the safety setting needs to be made persistent. But the amount of rage flowing through this thread is totally exaggerated and it is quite clear that this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills. Which isn't even true with the new pve combat flag and the ability to create pvp flags for pilots after they have logged off. Seriously, non-consensual pvp is getting BUFFED, and all you people can do is predict doom and gloom It is the idea that this is being forced down my throat that annoys me especially as the only people who need it are the people who can't read a box that says, I paraphrase, If you continue with this action you will be blown into small pieces and your ashes will be scattered across space... Are you sure you want to do this. Oh wait I don't see that message cos I turned it off 3 years ago. As for safety itself messing with my kills, if I can turn mine off for good it would have absolutely no damn effect on them.
Again, nobody is arguing that they shouldn't be made persistant.
The point being made was that it will be virtually impossible for you to forget that the safety is on when you log in (your weapons are red, obvious green light in your face, etc.), and it takes less than a second to change it.
Hardly the end of the world, or even a serious issue. At worst, a very minor inconvenience . To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2772
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 17:01:00 -
[307] - Quote
SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:ANGRY23 wrote:I'm still waiting on valid reason from dev's from this team for implementing this unfinished product that isnt persistant and cant be set to default red/off. This shouldnt be force fed to low sec or null sec players if it cant like everything else in the client be customisable by the user and remembered when i log off. Every other team has been making changes based on customer feedback from testing and forum posts and have listened to feedback from us, so far i see devs only replying to questions regarding parts of this blog people arent whining about. Lots of cool stuff coming on tuesday and this just puts a massive smudge on the icing of an otherwise decent expansion.
Have it remember our prefences or dont add it till it can. 1: Yes, it should be made persistant as soon as feasable, preferably in the point release that will follow shortly after the main release (since everything is feature locked at this point). 2: It would be incredibly stupid to make the default of a safety to be the "Off" position. Anything else would be extremely counter intuitive and user unfriendly. Don't undermine the only valid point you have. 3: How many alts are you going to post in this thread with. So far I count 2... or is it 3 now? Corpmates agreeing with him, yes but he has posted on no alts tyvm. Oh and for a pirate setting the default to green/on is a pretty stupid idea which is why Angry is asking that we all as players have the ability to choose the default setting for our own needs. Sure, sure, no alts involved. Whatever you say. As I said, I too am in favor of making the players choice of default preference persistant... but until we have that making the safety default to Green is the only sensible choice. Who cares what the initial setting is, we sure as hell don't, all we want is to log on when it goes live, turn it off and forget about it. Oh and to help some people like Angry don't fly in corps containing only their alts they have others who will follow them :)
I'm well aware of the size, membership and mindset of your little group. I have nothing against your organization as a whole, only the person or two posting in this thread with a thinly concealed "get rid of it altogether" agenda.
Nobody cares if you want to turn it off and forget it, the only thing people are slightly concerned about is the ability to set it to the level they wish and have that setting persist. That satisfy's the needs of people in your line of work AND the rest of the EvE community. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
SB Rico
the united Negative Ten.
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 17:54:00 -
[308] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:I'm well aware of the size, membership and mindset of your little group. I have nothing against your organization as a whole, only the person or two posting in this thread with a thinly concealed "get rid of it altogether" agenda. Nobody cares if you want to turn it off and forget it, the only thing people are slightly concerned about is the ability to set it to the level they wish and have that setting persist. That satisfy's the needs of people in your line of work AND the rest of the EvE community.
Obviously not so aware of our mindset as the point is we don't care if it exists or not, we just want the release of it delayed until it persists. While CCP are rushing this change in with a real last minute we know it doesn't work but we wanna do it anyway attitude. By their own admission they know it isn't finished but they seem to be taking the attitude that they will just chuck it anyway and hope noone complains so they don't need to make it work.
You are actually trying to discredit a bunch of people arguing for the same damn point but wanting CCP to sort that out BEFORE they launch it.
Or more simply...
Don't care what it's initial setting is Don't care if it is implemented or not CARE that it is implemented ONLY when it is finished |
Strider Hiryu
ICEBOX. Negative Ten.
20
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 19:40:00 -
[309] - Quote
Oh **** another neg 10 dude alt posting!!!!
I don't care about your useless new "feature"! As long as i can disable it like your other useless features like, i dunno, captains quarters.
Thanks for your time Peace be with your May the force be with you.
|
Highauger EdenNight
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:19:00 -
[310] - Quote
If only this new safety system existed in real life, I wouldn't have accidentally ram-raided Argos.
And congratulating that lady on being pregnant when she wasn't? we'll I guess that would have still happened.
good work |
|
Highauger EdenNight
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 20:22:00 -
[311] - Quote
Strider Hiryu wrote:Oh **** another neg 10 dude alt posting!!!!
I don't care about your useless new "feature"! As long as i can disable it like your other useless features like, i dunno, captains quarters.
Thanks for your time Peace be with your May the force be with you.
why are you even here man. 'peace be with your' lol peasant
Dev's keep up the good work, on behalf of the rest of us |
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
136
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 21:28:00 -
[312] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills. Easy kills will still be easy even if someone has to turn off their safety, it's the hard kills that are a problem.
The real rage here is that this is EVE and why the **** do I have a safety! |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2774
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 22:44:00 -
[313] - Quote
Some Rando wrote:Terrorfrodo wrote:this little annoyance serves as a cover for rage aimed at the safety setting itself because some people fear that they'll miss out on easy kills. Easy kills will still be easy even if someone has to turn off their safety, it's the hard kills that are a problem. The real rage here is that this is EVE and why the **** do I have a safety! To be fair even SEAL teams or professional assassins have safetys on their weapons. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2774
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 22:48:00 -
[314] - Quote
SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:I'm well aware of the size, membership and mindset of your little group. I have nothing against your organization as a whole, only the person or two posting in this thread with a thinly concealed "get rid of it altogether" agenda. Nobody cares if you want to turn it off and forget it, the only thing people are slightly concerned about is the ability to set it to the level they wish and have that setting persist. That satisfy's the needs of people in your line of work AND the rest of the EvE community. Obviously not so aware of our mindset as the point is we don't care if it exists or not, we just want the release of it delayed until it persists. While CCP are rushing this change in with a real last minute we know it doesn't work but we wanna do it anyway attitude. By their own admission they know it isn't finished but they seem to be taking the attitude that they will just chuck it anyway and hope noone complains so they don't need to make it work. You are actually trying to discredit a bunch of people arguing for the same damn point but wanting CCP to sort that out BEFORE they launch it. Or more simply... Don't care what it's initial setting is Don't care if it is implemented or not CARE that it is implemented ONLY when it is finished
Yeah, we get that already. No need to keep repeating variations on the same point.
Again, since the state of the safety is so blindingly obvious at all times, the rest of us feel competent enough to notice and turn it off if desired until this can be addressed.
Tempest in a teacup. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 22:49:00 -
[315] - Quote
Waiting for the new CCP dev band polka "Soften the **** Up" at next fanfest. |
Andy Moo
the united Negative Ten.
3
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 23:22:00 -
[316] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:To be fair even SEAL teams or professional assassins have safetys on their weapons.
And when they disable the safety they have to make a conscious decision to enable it again. Your point is completely irrelevant. |
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
137
|
Posted - 2012.11.29 23:36:00 -
[317] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:To be fair even SEAL teams or professional assassins have safetys on their weapons. I read that as "professional asshats".
And Andy Moo's post stands (hopefully EVE doesn't act like my old K98 and lock up the whole assembly if you try to rack a round with the safety at half!) |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2774
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 00:25:00 -
[318] - Quote
Andy Moo wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:To be fair even SEAL teams or professional assassins have safetys on their weapons. And when they disable the safety they have to make a conscious decision to enable it again. Your point is completely irrelevant. Since the point being somewhat jovially discussed in his post that I was responding to was:
Quote:The real rage here is that this is EVE and why the **** do I have a safety!
and had nothing to do with the enable/disable controversy your nerd rage blinders have caused you to completely miss the point yet again.
Nice try though. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
10
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 03:13:00 -
[319] - Quote
SB Rico wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:I'm well aware of the size, membership and mindset of your little group. I have nothing against your organization as a whole, only the person or two posting in this thread with a thinly concealed "get rid of it altogether" agenda. Nobody cares if you want to turn it off and forget it, the only thing people are slightly concerned about is the ability to set it to the level they wish and have that setting persist. That satisfy's the needs of people in your line of work AND the rest of the EvE community. Obviously not so aware of our mindset as the point is we don't care if it exists or not, we just want the release of it delayed until it persists. While CCP are rushing this change in with a real last minute we know it doesn't work but we wanna do it anyway attitude. By their own admission they know it isn't finished but they seem to be taking the attitude that they will just chuck it anyway and hope noone complains so they don't need to make it work. You are actually trying to discredit a bunch of people arguing for the same damn point but wanting CCP to sort that out BEFORE they launch it. Or more simply... Don't care what it's initial setting is Don't care if it is implemented or not CARE that it is implemented ONLY when it is finished
^^^^ What he said ^^^^^ |
usrevenge
Enlightened Industries Test Alliance Please Ignore
40
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 07:17:00 -
[320] - Quote
I just know I'l get concorded now. turn off safeties, few weeks later f1, miss click on target 2 seconds later egg ship. |
|
ANGRY23
the united Negative Ten.
33
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 15:15:00 -
[321] - Quote
Tumbleweed
Thanks for ignoring feedback and not replying to any questions.
Is there anyone from this dev team available to comment or will i come back on tuesday to and post in the feedback thread once its on tq and i have to have it cover my % readout and have to switch it off at every log in 3 or 4 times and nothing can be done till you start patching fixes. You cant seriously intend to roll out unfinished content.
You said it wasnt ready in time and im pretty sure you wouldnt put an half built gearbox in you car. If your mechanic told you your car would be ready on tuesday with a new gearbox and the gearbox wasnt finished would you just get him to fit it anyway or would you wait till the end of the week when he had it done properly?
More Tumbleweed
Angry23 |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
2781
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 17:14:00 -
[322] - Quote
ANGRY23 wrote:Tumbleweed
Thanks for ignoring feedback and not replying to any questions.
Is there anyone from this dev team available to comment or will i come back on tuesday to and post in the feedback thread once its on tq and i have to have it cover my % readout and have to switch it off at every log in 3 or 4 times and nothing can be done till you start patching fixes. You cant seriously intend to roll out unfinished content.
You said it wasnt ready in time and im pretty sure you wouldnt put an half built gearbox in you car. If your mechanic told you your car would be ready on tuesday with a new gearbox and the gearbox wasnt finished would you just get him to fit it anyway or would you wait till the end of the week when he had it done properly?
More Tumbleweed
Angry23 He's already told you it's going in as is, and that making the settings persistant would be something added afterwards if enough people want it.
I realize you didn't like his answer, but that doesn't change the fact that your concern was responded to already.
I have little doubt that demand will continue to have the settings be made persistant. In fact, if this isn't on the plate for the point release afterwards I'll join you in needling them. But seriously, having checked it out on the test server it is no where near as onerous as you seem to think it will be. And yes, I operate extensively in all security levels of EvE space (with a slight emphasis on Low Sec). To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
13
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 17:55:00 -
[323] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:ANGRY23 wrote:Tumbleweed
Thanks for ignoring feedback and not replying to any questions.
Is there anyone from this dev team available to comment or will i come back on tuesday to and post in the feedback thread once its on tq and i have to have it cover my % readout and have to switch it off at every log in 3 or 4 times and nothing can be done till you start patching fixes. You cant seriously intend to roll out unfinished content.
You said it wasnt ready in time and im pretty sure you wouldnt put an half built gearbox in you car. If your mechanic told you your car would be ready on tuesday with a new gearbox and the gearbox wasnt finished would you just get him to fit it anyway or would you wait till the end of the week when he had it done properly?
More Tumbleweed
Angry23 He's already told you it's going in as is, and that making the settings persistant would be something added afterwards if enough people want it. I realize you didn't like his answer, but that doesn't change the fact that your concern was responded to already. I have little doubt that demand will continue to have the settings be made persistant. In fact, if this isn't on the plate for the point release afterwards I'll join you in needling them. But seriously, having checked it out on the test server it is no where near as onerous as you seem to think it will be. And yes, I operate extensively in all security levels of EvE space (with a slight emphasis on Low Sec).
And if we don't point out it sucks, how will CCP know we want the ability to turn off this care bear feature for ourselves? Stop your constant trolling of those of us who see an obvious flaw and inconsistency in the product, and go raise your post count elsewhere. |
Hans Jagerblitzen
Autocannons Anonymous Late Night Alliance
3402
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 17:57:00 -
[324] - Quote
Just stopping by to let you all know I will be addressing this at the Winter Summit, the persistence issue on the safety will by no means be ignored. I, too, will be one of the players having to mess with shutting this off every first undock when I log in, from Dec. 4 until it gets patched. And it should be patched, soon. ThereGÇÖs no reason to have this not be a toggled feature in the options menu.
That being said, the reason you haven't heard any response from the developers after 16 pages of anger is because their answer the first time remains the same. They are way past GÇ£add new thingsGÇ¥ and preparing the code for release. IGÇÖll be speaking with the team and the summit and doing my best to make sure this is a priority for the inevitable point release. Until then, calling the developers stupid or incompetent or deliberately designing this to be broken is a waste of time and energy. In addition to personal attacks being a forum violation, they wonGÇÖt accelerate a solution to the problem. Rest assured I am equally frustrated and will be giving this my personal attention.
Vice Secretary of the 7th Council of Stellar Management.
|
Some Rando
University of Caille Gallente Federation
146
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 18:00:00 -
[325] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:He's already told you it's going in as is, and that making the settings persistant would be something added afterwards if enough people want it. I read it as they planned to do it later anyway.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2233309#post2233309
Kind of reminds me of persistent window states in the UI which, IMO, was the most odious oversight of that whole fiasco. I mean, this is totally minor in comparison but look how long it took them to get the UI to save states. Hopefully we'll get this in the next point release. |
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
89
|
Posted - 2012.11.30 21:22:00 -
[326] - Quote
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:Just stopping by to let you all know I will be addressing this at the Winter Summit, the persistence issue on the safety will by no means be ignored. I, too, will be one of the players having to mess with shutting this off every first undock when I log in, from Dec. 4 until it gets patched. And it should be patched, soon. ThereGÇÖs no reason to have this not be a toggled feature in the options menu.
That being said, the reason you haven't heard any response from the developers after 16 pages of anger is because their answer the first time remains the same. They are way past GÇ£add new thingsGÇ¥ and preparing the code for release. IGÇÖll be speaking with the team and the summit and doing my best to make sure this is a priority for the inevitable point release. Until then, calling the developers stupid or incompetent or deliberately designing this to be broken is a waste of time and energy. In addition to personal attacks being a forum violation, they wonGÇÖt accelerate a solution to the problem. Rest assured I am equally frustrated and will be giving this my personal attention.
Thank you very much for your reassurance Hans. I really hope you guys make sure this goes through and for once I don't have to wonder why the CSM is always silent or posts trivial comments on issues so important to players.
I just wanted to ask you if you read some of the posts on this thread explicitly describing why warning pop ups are still needed even with the safety feature. Only need to make it so they pop up when the safety is OFF and have an option to permanently disable them like you can with the rest of the pop ups.
For everyone else saying that only noob killing griefers are angry about this change, you're wrong. I love newbies and I think it's stupid that they get killed because of silly game mechanics, and honestly I LOVE THIS SAFETY FEATURE IDEA THINGY. My only beef is that it's not persistent, and that it's going to take away the option for us to decide on case by case basis which can be easily remedied with my suggestion above. |
Anise Lazair
Hedion University Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 00:54:00 -
[327] - Quote
Will the safety muzzle drones as well as modules? |
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
111
|
Posted - 2012.12.01 22:50:00 -
[328] - Quote
J3ssica Alba wrote:Anything that makes Eve a place full of happy joy joy is a good thing
This is why I'm starting to wonder if Greyscale isn't losing touch with the kind of game this is..... Anything that makes EVE all "chocolate and tulips" us just plain wrong.
This is EVE online. If someone is dumb enough to log off with hostiles probing the system and loses their ship then
1) that's supposed to happen 2) they'll learn not to do it again.
This is like creating an air-bag in the steering wheel when it's a type of game where when you do something dumb a big spike is supposed to eject straight into your neck. Seriously. Biggest waste of programming time ever.
T- |
Maraner
The Executioners Capital Punishment.
228
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 01:39:00 -
[329] - Quote
Not going to get listened to about this either.
Yet another 'feature' that no one has asked for that will be released prior to being ready that they will need to iterate on that will annoy the hell out of a large segment of the subscription paying veteran group.
Unreal! at least let me click a box in settings so I
1) Don't ever have to see that dummy button **** again
2) Don't have to set my options every time I log in.
3) If I can't see it I can pretend that CCP hasn't gone soft **** on us and is still releasing content rather than safety belts to people in a fricken computer game that used to pride itself on warfare and PVP.
grats guys, all the stuff you needed to work on you release this. At least the UI is getting fixed to a degree, was this CCP Arrows idea as well?
At least this is just a minor derp unlike the Unified Inventory debacle. Same as my interest in this game is becoming ...increasingly minor, where in the awesome gone CCP? You wont find it down the bottom of the barrel that your scraping.
Who exactly were you trying to please by putting this in the game without allowing the vets to turn it of, our ships , our consequences.
|
Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
113
|
Posted - 2012.12.02 10:31:00 -
[330] - Quote
Maraner wrote:Not going to get listened to about this either.
Yeah. Just to pick one example, we've been asking CCP for some basic support for colour blind people since 2005, which would have been about the same amount of effort to implement.
The fact that they spent their time doing THIS really irritates me.
T-
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |