Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Valterra Craven
280
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 02:52:00 -
[151] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Red Bluesteel wrote:CCP AGAIN YOU ******** RUIN a Great Game....
Over and Out
] Maybe you would prefer they went back to working on Incarna?
I'm game for that. I like looking at boobies, especially ones that could bounce in station! |
Gargep Farrow
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
67
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 03:16:00 -
[152] - Quote
We now get to see a downside to the 6 week schedule. This idea is nowhere near ready to launch in 5 days. While the idea of module rebalancing is good, this particular method is not.
1. I will repeat what others have said; "The new names SUCK". Ample rocket launcher, is lame. Scoped Arbalest rocket launcher, or Expanded Arbalest rocket launcher, yep, I can go for that.
2. Arbitrarily changing the stats, and therefore the value of the items sitting in hangars or on the market, is not a good way to keep your players happy.
Sorry CCP this idea needs to be put on hold. |
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
462
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 03:40:00 -
[153] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:1. NPC drop rate is not equal to the amount of modules that make it to the market. Most missioners don't bother looting and in the past the vast majority of those useless meta modules ended up in the shredder (might still be the case). This fact merely indicates that the supply of metas from NPCs far exceeds the combined demand for metas *and* T1 modules by players, which is why most T1 modules will continue to see no use.
TigerXtrm wrote: 2. The price for those modules is currently so low because no-one wants them unless they're sold under reprocessing value. Once they get a purpose and there is a demand for them, their price will go up to more reasonable levels for their purpose. Their T1 counterpart will become the baseline for the price with an extra markup on top to account for possible rarity or scarcity, depending on how much the modules are going to be used.
Not likely, esp. for the cheaper modules, and given the supply situation you spelled out in (1). As long as the supply far exceeds the demand, meta module prices will remain baselined on reprocessing value.
Also, as someone else pointed out, players have a lot more ISK these days. So, a 50K ISK meta module is always going to be used over a 5K ISK T1 module, despite the 10x cost difference, even by noob players.
If T1 modules do not have any stat advantages, then meta modules needs to have a signficantly higher absolute cost (not merely a markup on the cost of the T1 module), in order for players to consider using T1 modules. In order to achieve this situation, metas either need to be much more scarce (ie. a large reduction in NPC drop rates), and/or need to reprocess for much higher value than the T1 equivalents.
And, yes, this adjustment would result in a one-time benefit to everyone who has a stockpile of metas, but the market would adjust as those stockpiles are depleted, and profitable T1 module manufacturing would become viable again.
|
JamesT KirkJr
the oasis group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 03:47:00 -
[154] - Quote
Cae Lara wrote:I'll have to dissent from everybody crying 'muh immersion'. Clicking through show info->variations->compare->click meta level to literally look at a spreadsheet on every item type is not immersion and is not enjoyable. Great, current players had to go through that nonsense so surely every player should have to from now until the end of time? How about no, but I can dig people asking for some of the flavor text to be retained on item names in addition to clear and consistent markers of what a module is and does.
+1 to finding better adjectives. Ample sounds goofy and scoped doesn't even begin to make sense.
How about just fixing the "lets hide the info inside clicky menu after clicky menu" UI design instead? That would certainly solve the problems you mention.
And hey, how about showing the important stats of an object when you see it in Market? That'd remove all of the reason for renaming things. When you click an item in Market, the header of the Market shows the item name and some info, but there's a big open space there just begging to be filled in with useful information, like the description, fitting, critical attributes, etc. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
638
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 03:57:00 -
[155] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:Red Bluesteel wrote:CCP AGAIN YOU ******** RUIN a Great Game....
Over and Out
] Maybe you would prefer they went back to working on Incarna?
if there was more content than just captains quarters and some fancy dress Incarna would have been a decent expansion. I mean looking around at other games it amazes me just how much people like to play dressup in computer games. I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me! In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod - Mara Rinn |
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
49
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:06:00 -
[156] - Quote
Your naming is garbage and your faction tiericide is stupid.
Oh, and the meta tiericide is stupid too. If, as stated in the dev blog, the idea is that all the flux coils give me similar overall cap recharge, then WHY take something other than the best fitting one? We're back at square one here.
1) If we are to do with named meta levels, then better fitting mods should sacrifice useful stats.
2) Simillary, T2 should be better for harder fitting (meta4 ewar anyone?).
3) A gazillion of absolutely equal faction modules is stupid. What's wrong with better and worse faction modules? The problem with named is, they are all relatively cheap. Price is almost never a balancing factor with them (there are odd exceptions like better named MAPCs that can be more expensive than the rest of a fit, but even then it's usually pocket change). So you can just go with the best one (though there are odd exceptions too. Ironically, one of the most prominent is light missiles with malkuth being a crucial low-cpu choice for certain fits as opposed to the "best named" arbalest).
With faction modules price is usually an important factor. It's relatively common to get the cheaper one if it's enough to do the job. Or, in odd cases, you can get a cheaper faction equivalent of a T2 (seprentis pasive armor resists come to mind).
If we are to forgo the price balancing factor entirely, then we might as well do with dedspace mods since their price is the only thing that balances their stats.
Moreover, with faction mods it's quite logical that different factions of New Eden have their own preferences and capabilities when making their respective faction mods, so the mods can not be similar and should reflect the faction flavour.
4) Naming. Dear CCP. Your game has severely enhanced my memory capabilities for which I'm eternally grateful to you. Please please please do not remove this wonderful opportunity for newer players. If you want to kill immersion that much please find another way. Sincerely yours, a faithful customer. |
JamesT KirkJr
the oasis group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:11:00 -
[157] - Quote
Are all of you uber knowledgeable people missing the point that the NAMES are way less important than the NERF to the stats??
Since people skip Meta 1 and 2 modules, let me point out that means 15-20% of the capability of the current T1 modules fit. Across the entire board (eventually).
How is this not generating an anti-nerf reaction? Besides mine, of course.
To CCP, I don't really give a crap about any of the things you claim I am getting in exchange. You're taking the PRIMARY abilities of modes and nerf-batting them, and giving us SECONDARY this-and-thats in exchange. I am not using equipment for it's secondary capabilities, I'm using it for its PRIMARY purposes.
When I have a ship with X amount of DPS because it has Meta 4 launchers on it, and you NERF THE DPS BY 20%, how am I going to overcome that NERF with my skill, when I as a player am already fighting players that have better equipment than me? Or running sites that challenge both my skills and my ship to the limits already?
Explain how this is not a freakin' HUGE NERF to the gameplay of every character who is not fully T2 fitted in every respect. Like me and my Prototype Arbalest torpedo launchers and XR-3200 HLMs.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
638
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:20:00 -
[158] - Quote
Gargep Farrow wrote:We now get to see a downside to the 6 week schedule. This idea is nowhere near ready to launch in 5 days. While the idea of module rebalancing is good, this particular method is not.
1. I will repeat what others have said; "The new names SUCK". Ample rocket launcher, is lame. Scoped Arbalest rocket launcher, or Expanded Arbalest rocket launcher, yep, I can go for that.
2. Arbitrarily changing the stats, and therefore the value of the items sitting in hangars or on the market, is not a good way to keep your players happy.
Sorry CCP this idea needs to be put on hold.
I agree, they really need to be posting what is going to be in the patch that shows up in 6 weeks and 4 days nowish (okay maybe get the patch out, and a week later or so), and not what is going live in 4 days
module tiericide is a great high level idea, and while most of the changes are okay and probably wont really affect anyone, getting into some of the good mods, and judging from what fozzie said in that trailer thingy that showed up the other day they shoehorned LMLs into the list of mods getting updated pretty last minute.
as it stands the only valuable meta mods are either equal t2 and/or are easier to fit. Meta DCs have slightly less stats but are much easier to fit, Also Neuts where meta > t2, with less cap use and easier to fit. Using my magic crystal ball on the future of other meta mods, and well I just don't see all that many meaningful changes. ah well should keep the reprocessing crews happy I guess? I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me! In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod - Mara Rinn |
Marlenus
Ironfleet Towing And Salvage
2
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:21:00 -
[159] - Quote
I have been around a long time and I *still* have to "show info" on a ton of meta modules, especially in the categories where there are five flavors of basic modules cluttering up my old inventory stacks. I whole-heartedly love the notion of combining and rationalizing a bunch of the meta modules. I do agree however that with stuff like weapons systems, there are plenty of parameters to tweak for more than two flavors of meta mods.
My biggest concern, though, as a scruffy salvager type, is that you are making rat loot EVEN MORE BORING.
Right now, if there aren't any faction wrecks in your loot field, the only possible interesting loot item you're going to find is a rare Meta4 module that's actually worth some ISK. There aren't many of these, and most looting now is an endless refrain of "worthless, dull, worthless, boring, worthless, dull, scrap, fail, worthless." When rat loot had more mineral value, at least there was that. Now? Nah.
So now we are combining four different metas of varying rarities into one or two varieties. Assuming no changes to the loot table, the rares will now be more common (Malkuth and Arbelest drops combined into one new module drop) and less valuable.
I don't offer this as a reason not to do it. Simplifying the fitting experience for new players is enough reason to do it, IMO, in a game with declining enrollment. Good plan, long overdue.
But that leaves the question: What can you do to make rat looting more interesting?
I know this is a PvP game. The PvE experience is never the priority. But there have been a lot of changes over the years that have made rat looting more generic, less valuable, and much less interesting. Isn't it time to spice it up a little?
Obviously we don't want random Gurista pirates dropping faction loot. I mean, we WANT it, but it doesn't make game design sense. But couldn't they at least drop some quafe, or some exotic dancers? Couldn't every rat have some small fractional-percentage chance of having *something* unusual or amusing or modestly valuable in his personal locker when we blow him up?
I feel like looting is going to be EVEN MORE BORING after these useful and valuable changes. Throw us a bone, here? |
Arronicus
Caldari Navy Reconnaissance
1137
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:27:00 -
[160] - Quote
This is a very nice start to a very long overdue fix. It has been a plight on the diversity in Eve that most named modules have been useless for anything other than reprocessing, and that many meta 4 modules are better than their tech 2 meta 5 counterparts in all ways. Good job on taking the first steps to fixing this problem, in a way that actually creates useful diversity within the module groups. Now about that rorqual fix.... >.> |
|
Syri Taneka
NOVA-CAINE
109
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:46:00 -
[161] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Aquila Sagitta wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:I think you screwed up Restrained Capacitor Flux Coil, as they're flatly better in every way than the T2 version. Aside from that this looks like a good design philosophy for named mods. This. It doesn't follow the theme at all... Its even more powerful then the cosmos versions Well spotted, this should actually be -25% (which is what you'll see on Sisi just now). We'll get that changed in the blog.
But that doesn't RESTRAIN the drawback, that makes the drawback (reduced capacitor) WORSE. High cap recharge is a wonderful thing, but a thick reservoir is often more important in a battle, if for no other reason than Neut/NOS warfare. To properly Restrain the drawback, you need a smaller chunk taken out of cap capacity and a subsequent reduction in recharge rate (to keep the module in line with other options).
Also, on a side note, I would like to suggest changing the word 'Restrained' to 'Mitigated'. |
Mei Nakamura
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:53:00 -
[162] - Quote
I'd just like to add a +1 to the opinion that changing the names sucks. Learning all the names and their respective pros/cons was one of the things that got me hooked on this game.
As a noob, I distinctly remember feeling a sense achievement when I got my first Malkuth drop, or could afford my first prototype gauss gun. I didn't always fit the meta 4's because I didn't know such a scale existed and even when I did, I mostly couldn't afford to buy them anyway. The price differential made it "ok" for there to be better versions of everything. Sometimes I fit lesser modules just because I thought the names were cooler and they were cheaper.
It's easy to forget that when you've been around for a while, and you start using meta 4's or T2 by default, but I think the proposed changes are the wrong way to fix that. If it were me, I'd leave everything where it is, warts and all, and instead add BPC drops for named modules, allowing for inventing T2 named modules.. 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher II anyone??
|
JamesT KirkJr
the oasis group TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 04:59:00 -
[163] - Quote
Mei Nakamura wrote:I'd just like to add a +1 to the opinion that changing the names sucks. Learning all the names and their respective pros/cons was one of the things that got me hooked on this game.
As a noob, I distinctly remember feeling a sense achievement when I got my first Malkuth drop, or could afford my first prototype gauss gun. I didn't always fit the meta 4's because I didn't know such a scale existed and even when I did, I mostly couldn't afford to buy them anyway. The price differential made it "ok" for there to be better versions of everything. Sometimes I fit lesser modules just because I thought the names were cooler and they were cheaper.
It's easy to forget that when you've been around for a while, and you start using meta 4's or T2 by default, but I think the proposed changes are the wrong way to fix that. If it were me, I'd leave everything where it is, warts and all, and instead add BPC drops for named modules, allowing for inventing T2 named modules.. 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher II anyone??
+1 for an original and very likely better idea. |
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3377
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 05:12:00 -
[164] - Quote
Removed a yellow wall. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
7
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 05:29:00 -
[165] - Quote
Why are you doing this? I do not want to play with illiterate people that are to dumb to click the compare button in the module info. What will this game be when you dumb it further down? Eve lives mostly, if not only from the complexity and difficulty. If you take this away, what stays? |
Benito Arias
Angry Mustellid
40
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 05:46:00 -
[166] - Quote
Tiericide, fine, but keep the damn naming interesting. Don't want Scoped railguns or Restrained whatever, it just sounds stupid. Use thesaurus, keep the names immersive, and leave the trademarks be! Don't you touch my IFFAs and my Faint Epsilon scramblers.
Added. And if you stick to your plan of makeng it all bleak and boring, does it mean you will be renaming MWDs again? Heh. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon Cynosural Field Theory.
1053
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 05:47:00 -
[167] - Quote
Benito Arias wrote:Tiericide, fine, but keep the damn naming interesting. Don't want Scoped railguns or Restrained whatever, it just sounds stupid. Use thesaurus, keep the names immersive, and leave the trademarks be! Don't you touch my IFFAs and my Faint Epsilon scramblers.
I was frankly saddened when they touched my Y-T8 overcharged hydrocarbon microwarpdrives, those were my absolute favorite name.
Would be nice if they could have a checkbox in the settings to turn off "simple names". So we could get back all the good ones. Why not, CCP? |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
6613
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:12:00 -
[168] - Quote
Who ever came up with the naming scheme for the new modules is the most bland and boring person ever. I hate myself for saying this, but the names need more psssshhhh. |
Lord Echon
Adventurers
11
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:16:00 -
[169] - Quote
All in all, I welcome the module tiercide. Having niche roles for the named modules is a huge improvement over them not seeing any use (besides meta 4, of course).
However, as has already been mentioned, faction turrets and launchers need to be looked at. They are inferior to their T2 counterparts, and personally I am not sure allowing them the use of T2 ammo makes sense. They should be given a unique bonus of some sort to make them worthwhile, and justify the price tag.
Also, the naming scheme for the new meta 1 items seems rather bland compared to the colourful names of the old named modules. |
Erien Rand
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
17
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:23:00 -
[170] - Quote
Hello Fozzie,
I love the work you are doing and you obviously care greatly about our game. However, as many other have said, those names remove a layer of depth and immersion from the game.
I remember when I started the game part of what kept me around was the excitement of finding some obscurely named item and then having to research a bit to see if it was worth anything. That is was very engaging to a 2 month old newbie in a poorly fit Vexor and his 4 hobgoblin I's.
I have dipped my toe into other MMOs and come running back to Eve every time, part of it was the fact that item naming was so simplistic and I essentially had a bunch of junk with the same name in my bag.
I implore you to consider keeping the legacy names in some way on each item, I feel that you are removing some of the "color" from the game. Perhaps add the new names as "traits" in the show info or have them appear when you mouse over the item.
Thanks for reading |
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
83
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:32:00 -
[171] - Quote
I remember confussion with so many modules and tiers when i started to play EvE. Changing names that way won't help, there are just too many of them for new players. Also there's a compare tool, great device for every player. I don't think we need name changing for group of mods every six weeks. You guys just can't resist, can you? Overall idea is good and you have to break it with some unnecessary change. Bad for vets, not really helping new ones. My breakfast was AMPLE but after reading the blog i have heartburn. Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.-á
I am the night. I'm Bantam. |
Emiko Rowna
Aliastra Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:47:00 -
[172] - Quote
Would this not work better?
Co-Processor Of the Tiger Co-Processor Of the Bear Co-Processor Of the Gorilla Co-Processor Of the Boar Co-Processor Of the Monkey Co-Processor Of the Falcon Co-Processor Of the Wolf Co-Processor Of the Tiger Co-Processor Of the Eagle Co-Processor Of the Whale Co-Processor Of the Owl |
Naket Kalidor
The Flying Wombats
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 06:52:00 -
[173] - Quote
Naming should be interesting, and all the laws of communication are against systematic naming. People want to be individual, selling products requires individual products even if it is the same thing a thousand times in a different package with a different name. Having systematic names kills the individuality in the game and the overall game perception as an interesting myterious universe. Isn't this mysterious universe what you sell? |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
720
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 07:14:00 -
[174] - Quote
This new "simple" naming scheme is horrible and takes out a whole lot of flavor from the game. For the sake of being special, decide for one of the old Meta 1-4 names and make it "Compact B88 Micro Auxiliary Power Core" or something similar. Reducing names to a set of mere standard name pieces for all the modules removes a great deal of felt variety from the game, which is bad in my opinion. |
Moloney
Faceless Men
164
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 08:12:00 -
[175] - Quote
Will meta modules have the advantages of current meta 2 modules or meta 4 modules?
Aka, how many of my ship fittings are now obsolete and how much value is being removed from my inventory? |
Zappity
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
1347
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 08:14:00 -
[176] - Quote
Are you going to modify the drop rates when you remove a module from a specific lineup? You probably need to reduce the drop rates of meta 1-3 a little now that invention won't use them. I realise that the current meta-4 value will be distributed over some of the other metas but I doubt it is adequate given the enormous supply and existing invention demand. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Barton Breau
University of Caille Gallente Federation
72
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 08:24:00 -
[177] - Quote
Shouldnt this be postponed till it looks less than something that was thought over for less than the time it took to write the dev blog? |
Moloney
Faceless Men
164
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 08:39:00 -
[178] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone, the overall module rework has been a long time coming and it feels great to start rolling it out! Hopefully these changes and the ones that follow will help make your fitting experience a more engaging one.
No the new naming conventions are great for coders / dev and boring for customers.
|
Marox Calendale
Human League
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 08:55:00 -
[179] - Quote
How is this new "All named modules are meta 1 modules" concept working with T2 BPC Invention, as at the moment the Meta 4 Modules grant higher chances for a successful invention than meta 1 - 3 do? |
Emiko Rowna
Aliastra Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.26 09:01:00 -
[180] - Quote
Marox Calendale wrote:How is this new "All named modules are meta 1 modules" concept working with T2 BPC Invention, as at the moment the Meta 4 Modules grant higher chances for a successful invention than meta 1 - 3 do?
Read this Dev Blog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/lighting-the-invention-bulb/
The part about "Merging Invention with Reverse Engineering" near the bottom.
It comes down to meta items will no longer be a part of the invention process. At least if I'm reading it right. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |