Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Steijn
Quay Industries
642
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:40:36 -
[151] - Quote
Gypsien Agittain wrote:Proton Stars wrote:well i've no reason to have my 0.0 characters anymore. I can sell my isk making toons and be a super rich frigate pilot and save -ú70 a month on accounts, so good on that respect.
Bad because there will be no narrative to the combat in 0.0, its become world of tanks in space with lots of not really connected instance fights that will be between frigates and ships not really worth hunting. Im glad that CCp kept with its tradition of not actually thinking about the value of gameplay and instead decided that a t1 frigate must be able to do everything
And frigate pilots will fly to Elite Dangerous and Scam Citizen, and when they want to attract people back to the game with capital ships, what bringed most of the player base to EVE, it'd be too late.
ED needs to get rid of the hackers first as open play is dying a bit atm. |
Cheyennes
Evil Doers
4
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:41:37 -
[152] - Quote
The big blocks will be richer.
Fewer sov bills. Strategic systems within a jump of an R-64. Pos's at every isk moon that will only get you blobbed..... awesome concept... please let the minnions come to null..... the tears in a year that they can't afford to live there will be epic! |
2Sonas1Cup
16
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:42:21 -
[153] - Quote
I trully love this change, I can tell how much dynamic and activity it ill bring to eve.
Obviously not everyone can understand it, especially old vets that are accostumed to an easier way of eve. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
438
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:43:09 -
[154] - Quote
2Sonas1Cup wrote:I trully love this change, I can tell how much dynamic and activity it ill bring to eve.
Obviously not everyone can understand it, especially old vets that are accostumed to an easier way of eve. see, only npc characters like this |
iP0D
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:43:21 -
[155] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:"Incentives? What are those?"
Incentives are something different from rewards and payments. It's a behavioural thing related to something known as emergent gameplay, you know - that stuff from the first decade when it was deemed more interesting to tailor the product towards a less costly model of venture development :-)
|
Saidin Thor
The Odin Conspiracy
41
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:43:28 -
[156] - Quote
I'm not sure CCP has ever had to deal with IHhub logistics first-hand. Being easy to destroy may or may not be a good thing, but IHubs are a HUGE pain to place and upgrade right now. Bigger upgrades AND the IHubs themselves can only be transported in a freighter right now. There's no way a little alliance has the logistics capacity to regularly replace IHubs that roaming gangs will be destroying just for the lulz unless that changes.
If you want to stick with the "but sov logistics should be hard" mantra, then at least resizing them for jump freighters would be better than nothing. Ideally, making IHubs and their upgrades Blockade Runner size would open up a lot of options for the little guy.
Also the premise that defenders will regularly use jump bridges during capture events has to be a joke, right? Have the CCP employees that live in null sec ever tried chaining jump bridges since the fatigue changes went through? Let us know how that worked out for them for the subsequent two weeks. |
Cheyennes
Evil Doers
4
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:43:29 -
[157] - Quote
2Sonas1Cup wrote:I trully love this change, I can tell how much dynamic and activity it ill bring to eve.
Obviously not everyone can understand it, especially old vets that are accostumed to an easier way of eve.
almost snorted coffee out of my nose..... last time I checked, the gates to 0.0 didn't require a key.
|
Andre Vauban
Quantum Cats Syndicate
374
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:44:13 -
[158] - Quote
I'm currently a FW pilot and haven't been in null since 2008, so take this comment with that in mind. What I currently love about FW sov is the ability to make progress towards the goal across all time zones. The 4 hour "primetime" goes against this concept (ie farms and fields), as if you are not in that prime time you are not capable of attacking your enemy in any way or defending your own assets in any way. I would highly suggest that you change the prime time window in some way.
For example, instead of pricing a single 4 hour block, each alliance is required to pick three 2-hour blocks that cannot be adjacent (ie 15:00-17:00, 18:00-20:00, and 21:00-23:00). This will force the fights to be spread across more time zones with a minimum of a 8 hour span.
Another example would be to keep the 4 hour "primetime", but force setting a different value for each of the IHUB, TCU, and station such that there can never be a one hour period of time where all three overlap. This would result in a minimum of a 9 hour window where SOMETHING was vulnerable.
Another example would be to introduce a "random" hour to each structure individually. In this example, each structure would have a random 1 hour window (calculated at downtime) each day where it was vulnerable. When a structure becomes vulnerable, it picks a random time somewhere within the the 4 hour window plus that days random hour (not the random hour when it was reinforced as that would benefit the attacker too greatly). As an optional enhancement, let the structure owner specify 8 unique 1-hour blocks (disjoint from the prime time) which restricts the times where the "random" hour can be.
I think the current system will drive alliance to form around dense 4-hour timezones. If that happens, those alliances will only be effectively fighting other alliances in the same blocks while just staring at alliances outside their 4-hour primetime with zero ability to impact them in any meaningful way.
QCATS is recruiting:-á
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3896299
|
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
33
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:44:38 -
[159] - Quote
What about the following scenario:
Person A from one corp starts hacking (time 0:00). At 2:30 an enemy gang appears and starts shooting him. Person B (from the same corp as Person A) arrives and starts hacking right before Person A dies (time 3:00). At time 5:00, a full 5 minutes have hacking has been done, but person B has 3:00 left on their cycle (let's assume he tanks them long enough to live till time 5:00). Will that count as hacking the structure or does it need to be 5 minutes completed by a single entosis link. I feel like letting people chain hacks together could be abused so i hope it ends up requiring a single ship to live for the entire 5 minutes. |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
4863
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:44:46 -
[160] - Quote
Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.
CSM 7 Secretary
CSM 6 Alternate Delegate
@two_step_eve on Twitter
My Blog
|
|
the sargent
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:45:25 -
[161] - Quote
It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"
I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.
Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text. |
Hicksimus
Xion Limited Resonance.
543
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:45:55 -
[162] - Quote
I've been posting about the old CCP coming back...still not convinced? Fail a few more game projects and keep wasting time making half-assed nullsec changes....let me know how that works out for you.
Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you?
Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.
|
Master S
Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:48:41 -
[163] - Quote
If they proceed this update in the summer the game will die. (good for economy then, people get out more, finally we all see some sun and get some Vitamine D, instead of EvE stars and suns on our screens) Or most people who dont want to be in a big alliance, they go gank Hisec.
CCP proceed this and your core gamers will be gone, congratz! So instead of being different and original then other MMORPG's they will just be the same as WoW or other popular mindnumbing MMORPG's for people who don't want to use their brain and start complaining when the game gets harder.
- NRDS will be killed with this update (bye bye NRDS as we know it) since carebears won't protect their space, they go Hisec - alliances (big or small) will be even more awesome, the hard work, hours and hours of boring grinding in Bashfleets, the billions of isk that goes into infrastructure and what more, can be taken over in 10 mins, WOOT WOOT got to love that
and more stuff that will make it more dumb to get new players in
So next step in August will be pay for your system or your officer modules! Pay to win EVE, is what they are building towards!
Glad that i paid till June, see u guys after June in another game
gg CCP |
Jack Haydn
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
52
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:48:47 -
[164] - Quote
So you fortified the need for even bigger coalition building. The one who can field the most players in fast, agile ships is the one who can lock down the most systems (for either attack or defense) and run the most concurrent RFs or Command Node takeovers.
If you're a small timer, you'll get crushed by the coalitions who will always have more people available to chase and cockblock you, all while running their own Entosii in the meantime.
Pretty chastening. |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
514
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:49:05 -
[165] - Quote
So CCP, you've not really addressed the incentives for holding Sov, simply fighting for the sake of it isn't a proper conflict driver: see the rather dull area of EVE call nullsec.
It's a start I guess but:
Prime Time thing is a terrible idea, you'll see alliances start to lose their multinational flavour. If GSF sets prime time to US, what do all the EU guys do right? Must be a better option to scale this or opt out for other benefits, scale it base on alliance size.
This entosis thing, what happens if we get 5000 ceptors all with them on board? Wasn't this question asked at any point?
AFK cloaking - It's going to affect indices, for better or worse. |
Barbaydos
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:49:39 -
[166] - Quote
Two step wrote:Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.
this would be better than the 4 hour window of DOOM they are proposing. ideally it would be vulnerable 23.5/7 but just take longer to reinforce like the FW system, that way you can promote more fight across a wider timezone and it also encouraged alliances to not become a specific TZ heavy and have little no other timezones playerwise |
Nami Kumamato
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
561
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:49:53 -
[167] - Quote
Why not just make it simple ? Create- I dunno - a huge star-base that you can anchor a the frigging sun or whatever . If it gets destroyed it's no longer your system. Occupancy will get you bonuses towards how hard it is to get destroyed etc. You can defend it with platform/batteries and active fleets patrolling. The End.
" And now my ship is oh so cloaked and fit -
I never felt so good, I never felt so hid ! "
- Ramona McCandless, Untitled
|
W Sherman Elric
Blackstone Holdings Sev3rance
11
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:50:29 -
[168] - Quote
Two step wrote:Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.
yuk oh boy lets make this eu only alliance alarm clock for an AU TZ, not all alliances have strong presence in all three TZ's |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
254
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:50:59 -
[169] - Quote
Altrue wrote:The bad stuff:[list] Yay! Brave Collective will pick an US timezone and thanks to your new system, ensure that EU and AU get no chances to defend their space EVER. At least, with the current system we had the opportunity to actively prevent the first attack... Now all is left is the defense of station services, very exciting. Or maybe Brave could split into multiple alliances for differing timezones that are loosely affiliated in a coalition but are much more independent and locally operated. And then maybe once in awhile those alliances might get bored and actually fight each other instead of blue-ing up half the map, or draw conflict from smaller groups that want to take on, say, only AU Brave but not the entirety of US/EU/AU Brave.
Which, I think, was kind of the point. It's supposed to encourage these massive blocs to break up into smaller, localized units with people that actually PLAY TOGETHER in similar timezones, in space, with each other. Not just in name only.
|
Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion The Bastion
913
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:52:28 -
[170] - Quote
the sargent wrote:It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"
I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.
Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text.
Occupancy sov which has been asked for in multiple ways and venues implies that one needs to live in a system to even be able to claim the system. In this proposed one, no one needs to live there, they just need to orbit a few FW buttons to save the sov and keep trucking straight after that.
Blobbing also won't go anywhere, spreading 3000 pilots to 7 systems is still over 400 pilots per button orbiting, no small entity will be able to even try to capture a system in this model. Toss in three dozen supers on that button and unless you're willing to get get all the supers in every system in the constellation to be dropped on you, you might not want to enter the plex.
(Yes, using FW terms because this is exactly how FW works without the need to point a lazor beam at a floating box for 2 minutes prior to orbiting said button.) |
|
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1155
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:52:29 -
[171] - Quote
Q: Once a capture event is started, are the Command Nodes available outside of the owning alliance's prime-time vulnerability, or are they locked out?
I am officially coining the phrase Thunder-Zone (TZ), because sov warfare will soon be strictly limited to time zones rather than areas of space. The new Thunder-Zone is going to be late EU, early US, (Atlantic) obviously. Russian space will always be Russian. Same for AU.
However, should a large alliance or coalition of alliances decide to alarm clock it, they can spam inties across an entire region to effectively reinforce all the things across an entire region in 10-40 minutes.
The Entosis Link is an active module. I'm pretty sure the blog also stated that the Entosis Link requires a target lock. So having a 240km range means nothing if you can't lock that far.
Or a small super-heavy alliance like PL or NC. can drop supers in a system and reinforce with those without ever firing a shot. As they are immune to EWAR, jamming them to break target locks will be neigh-on impossible. I see nothing stopping them from reinforcing with supers. They will work just as well so long as they stay alive. Not sure if worth the risk though.
So the system, though significantly different on the surface, will not really change much, except for the station Freeporting. I really don't understand the point of that concept.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
iP0D
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:52:42 -
[172] - Quote
the sargent wrote:It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"
I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.
Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text.
That sounds like the typical stuff CCPians tell CSM and lurkers on IRC. Something which hasn't changed in over a decade, always the same story. You know we've had times where we had short release cycles before right? Always the Holy Grail of resource allocation in a company which is set to slowly lower the cost of development and maintenance ...
Sov is one of those things you need to figure out on a behavioural level, and set out for it to last at least half of such a second decade. Why? because of resource allocations required, and because it's tied so innately into what makes EVE commercially feasible that simply taking the mechanical low key routes within a closed system never ends up as anything but a disaster.
It's the end of null-sec as we know it, but the return of what we used to know - once upon a long ago. It's also indicative of a sense of necessity towards dumbing things down in order to make it easier to ... maintain.
Which is another word than "develop".
Don't presume the dev peeps are hearing from has a clue of the constraints set by the folks upstairs. |
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
993
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:53:18 -
[173] - Quote
Rowells wrote:ok before anyone else freekin says it, point me to the damn ceptor that can target out to 250km.
Most I can get on a Crow is 162km, and that Crow would die to a mildly equipped house fly.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
254
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:53:21 -
[174] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:we have to create a strategic mining division to protect important systems are you ******* kidding me
nullsec mining has been broken for ages, go look at the price of mega and zyd and then think about why on earth mining should play a role here
Getting people into space doing all variety of activities is the point. So yes, mining ops and industry members not being treated as second class citizens. Imagine that?
That said, yeah nullsec mining itself needs a fix to make that more than just a gimmick. But, I mean... perfect opportunity for the Rorq to be rebalanced into something awesome for just this purpose, right? |
Helios Panala
35
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:53:44 -
[175] - Quote
Alliances need to be able to set 'prime-time' on a per structure basis so that groups spread across multiple timezones can be given content, at the very least you can have your different TZs defending different borders.
Other than that looks good to me. |
iP0D
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:54:15 -
[176] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Rowells wrote:ok before anyone else freekin says it, point me to the damn ceptor that can target out to 250km. Most I can get on a Crow is 162km, and that Crow would die to a mildly equipped house fly.
[Hyena, Pause Butan] Damage Control II Overdrive Injector System II Overdrive Injector System II
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Script Medium Shield Extender II
Entosis Link II [empty high slot] [empty high slot]
Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Small Auxiliary Thrusters II
|
Amely Miles
Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate
47
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:54:18 -
[177] - Quote
Jack Haydn wrote:So you fortified the need for even bigger coalition building. The one who can field the most players in fast, agile ships is the one who can lock down the most systems (for either attack or defense) and run the most concurrent RFs or Command Node takeovers.
If you're a small timer, you'll get crushed by the coalitions who will always have more people available to chase and cockblock you, all while running their own Entosii in the meantime.
Pretty chastening.
they say in the blog
"the system considers every member of the owning alliance to be defenders and every other player to be attackers"
This means bigger Alliances not bigger Coalitions as the Coalition that comes to save your Sov will then be considered a "Attacker"
Favorite Quotes:
In Space No one flings Poo!!
Yes that is a Banana in my Pocket
http://spacemp.net
|
Komodo Askold
No Code of Conduct Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
311
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:54:35 -
[178] - Quote
I can't, and won't, talk about these Sov changes due to my complete lack of experience on the matter.
However, I am very intrigued about that Entosis Link. Does it mean we will finally be able to hack abandoned POS at W-Space? =3 |
ImageQuest
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:54:45 -
[179] - Quote
W Sherman Elric wrote:[quote=Two step]Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
yuk oh boy lets make this eu only alliance alarm clock for an AU TZ, not all alliances have strong presence in all three TZ's
I guess thats why it's publicly visible and takes 96hours to be swapped. If you are invading you will invade system that has presets you like. |
HeXxploiT
Little Red X
109
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 16:54:46 -
[180] - Quote
If I travel half way around the earth to conquer an enemies territory guess what...i'm fighting in their timezone. I'm not going too **** & moan from the trench that it's 3am my time. Remember guys Eve is Real! Looks like a lot of thought went into this new system. This is really going to shake things up. Will be interesting to see how the major power blocks adapt. I love the idea that individual pilots and small gangs are given more opportunity to do big things and make a name for themselves. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |