Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Stamm
Amarr RHC RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 00:02:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Stamm on 02/11/2007 00:04:17 Because clearly you haven't a clue what you're doing. And the groups you have are either too stupid, or you aren't listening.
Do the following.
Balance out rigs - It isn't hard. You put them in and forgot to balance them. A 15% cap rig with no penalties is better than a 15% cap use on one particular function with penalties. There's loads of crap rigs, and loads of uberpwn rigs.
Reduce the requirements for heat. Energy Management is a high rank skill, and you want people to train that, along with other stuff just so they can overload their modules? Come on CCP. It's been in for ages. Fix it.
Forget T2 jump freighters. If you must make jump freighters then make them tier 2. And give them a capacity that actually significantly exceeds a Rorqual.
If you're going to change anything with freighters then the big thing is removing their ability to logoffski.
Fix invention. Negative ME means invention is crap for most things compared to T2 BPOs. T2 BPOs already can be researched to near perfect ME. At least let invention reach 0 ME. It's been in the game long enough.
Galaxian Recruitment Info |
Keeper O'Secrets
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 00:04:00 -
[2]
/signed
|
silken mouth
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 00:24:00 -
[3]
signed
|
Nasair
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:25:00 -
[4]
TBH the cap skills are immense skills to have, overheating is the least of your worries if you dont have them and similar skills.
|
Danjira Ryuujin
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:34:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Stamm Edited by: Stamm on 02/11/2007 00:04:17 Balance out rigs
Totally agree here. Could use a little more variety in whats useable, and useful.
Originally by: Stamm
Reduce the requirements for heat. invention reach 0 ME. It's been in the game long enough.
This I disagree on. Overloading modules is an advanced ability and would really get noobs into trouble. I know, because it got me into trouble Training time required to get it helps keep even less experienced players from making this mistake. Especially with the somewhat clumsy interface.
Amarr - Annoying the Eve Community since 2005 |
WrathOfOprah
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:37:00 -
[6]
oh and work on fighter lag a lil' before you go around breaking the rest of the game.
|
Phaedruss
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:44:00 -
[7]
Signed.
I just can't believe the mentality behind the magnitude of some of these changes.
People spend weeks of training to get an extra few percent of effectiveness out of their modules, spend tens or hundreds of millions of isk on better modules/implants that give you a a little bit better fitting requirements, or save a week of training, or increase the effectiveness of modules. What does this tell you about the importance or perceived importance of an extra 3% or 5%?
Now take a look at the state of interdictors or damps (or anything else getting hit with the nerf bat) on SISI. It just isn't rational. If something absolutely must get nerfed, try starting with something small but significant, like 5%.
|
Draygo Korvan
Merch Industrial
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:51:00 -
[8]
/signed
And dont make regular freighters worse. --
|
Yorda
Kudzu Collective Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 01:59:00 -
[9]
CCP: Nerfs the stuffing out of 0.0 empires it tried desperately to create in the first place.
Yeah thanks for that buddy! No one like hauling stupid fluffing POS fuel. If some poor SOB is forced to haul it for longer it won't make your silly game more dynamic or exciting it will just make the poor logistics guys cry longer and hate life more.
Way to enhance your game where it counts! CCP we salute you.
I am still a goon so this signature stays |
Leon 026
Caldari Veto. Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 02:01:00 -
[10]
Nerfing current shiptypes in an effort to 'promote' new shiney additions to the game whos roles overlap existing shiptypes is also not a good way to go about it. -------
Leon 026 Once I was fallen, now I have wings |
|
Cordova
Caldari Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:30:00 -
[11]
Signed, You need Stamm on your team. The people you have seem to worry more about what you can nerf next. Have you ever thought if you nerf enough stuff people might decide not to play anymore? -----------------------------------------------
|
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:37:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Merin Ryskin on 02/11/2007 03:39:12
Originally by: Stamm Balance out rigs - It isn't hard. You put them in and forgot to balance them. A 15% cap rig with no penalties is better than a 15% cap use on one particular function with penalties. There's loads of crap rigs, and loads of uberpwn rigs.
This is actually not true: the 15% cap use rigs CAN be better than the recharge rigs, and in fact, is almost always better in pvp setups. Since I assume you're refering to the shield boost rigs, keep in mind a critical fact: pvp setups are not mission setups, they favor unsustainable peak power over long-term boosting. Since you're relying on a cap injector not your natural recharge, the cap use reduction rigs actually give you a longer time until cap-death than the cap size/recharge rigs.
But the general point remains: these nerfs are not only stupid and careless, they're entirely un-called for. Nobody is complaining about these modules, they're balanced just fine right now. This is just a case of nerfing things for the sake of nerfing something, and it's incredibly stupid game design.
Listen to your damn paying customers CCP: you have a lot of people ready to quit the game over this. I'm one of them... not because of any single nerf (I'll survive these just fine overall), but because it's a clear "**** YOU" to the players. Ignoring player input and wrecking the game for no reason is completely killing our confidence in the long-term future of this game.
To put it in simple terms: if these changes hit TQ in their current form, you WILL lose a lot of customers.
|
Brka
Vendetta Underground Rule of Three
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:38:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Brka on 02/11/2007 03:38:25 BIG SIGNED. But hey why would they listen now.
|
Arenis Xemdal
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 03:40:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Stamm Edited by: Stamm on 02/11/2007 00:04:17 Because clearly you haven't a clue what you're doing. And the groups you have are either too stupid, or you aren't listening.
Do the following.
Balance out rigs - It isn't hard. You put them in and forgot to balance them. A 15% cap rig with no penalties is better than a 15% cap use on one particular function with penalties. There's loads of crap rigs, and loads of uberpwn rigs.
Reduce the requirements for heat. Energy Management is a high rank skill, and you want people to train that, along with other stuff just so they can overload their modules? Come on CCP. It's been in for ages. Fix it.
Forget T2 jump freighters. If you must make jump freighters then make them tier 2. And give them a capacity that actually significantly exceeds a Rorqual.
If you're going to change anything with freighters then the big thing is removing their ability to logoffski.
Fix invention. Negative ME means invention is crap for most things compared to T2 BPOs. T2 BPOs already can be researched to near perfect ME. At least let invention reach 0 ME. It's been in the game long enough.
Agree that Energy Grid rigs should have penalties. They're a must have for any ship where adding 20mil in fittings makes sense.
Disagree that skill requirements for Heat need to be decreased, Energy Management is one of the quintessential skills every combat pilot should have. If you don't have it you're a goddamn newbie who should be worrying about other things.
I agree that CCP should scrap jump freighters. But I don't agree on them ever being a tech 1 ship, if they do go through with it.
Disagree on invention, the more T2 costs, the better!
|
BECKARD
Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 05:15:00 -
[15]
/signed <insert 1337 sig here, #ERROR/> |
Nyxus
Amarr GALAXIAN
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 05:23:00 -
[16]
/signed
Why wouldnt you wait till Fanfest to run these new changes by a couple of test groups of attending players? Other than the fact that poor Zulu would get slapped around from players yelling "wtf are you thinking??".
Nyxus
The Gallente ideals of Freedom, Liberty and Equality will be met by the Amarr realities of Lasers, Armor and Battleships. |
Zylatis
Umbra Congregatio
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 07:57:00 -
[17]
Signed. I have no problem training lots for a jump freighter given that its a pretty uber kinda thing (the non-pre-nerfed version anyway) but making t2 is a bit of a stretch given how stupid t2 capital invention would be, i mean really. Theyd cost waaaaaay to much to justify it and youd find within 2 weeks of these changes half of 0.0 would run out of pos fuel and we'd all go play WoW.
|
Koala Bare
eXceed Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.11.02 08:07:00 -
[18]
Stamm,
CCP know EXACTLY what they are doing, and the exact impact of these changes - and more importantly of the control trends now driven - on the various elements and types of the subscribers in game.
The focus is really simple:
1. No Capital Online, but back to EVE Online. 2. Never ever let one player organisation effectively dominate the game for all intents and purposes. 3. A simple culling of the older generations of EVE subscribers to regain a degree of control over the social networks.
They will do everything required to break things up for this, regardless of the methods, take note of the timing of the upcoming patch, the fanfest and a number of changes on Sisi.
This isn't about the holy grail of making sure people use ships and mechanics ONLY in the way CCP intend them. This isn't about differences in what CCP's definition of "logistics" (remote support) and that if the players (moving stuff). And it really isn't about pushing new feature sets like those of the new jump freighters.
It's dead simple. - the older subscribers are more trouble then they are worth - large organisations have had too much impact on the path of eve and its commercial exposure - and everyone in eve is making something out of the game which ultimately cannot be provided for on a technical level.
So, everyone should bend over now while folks are drunk at the fanfest.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |