open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: t0rfifrans announces our mini-expansion Apocrypha 1.5
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 : last (10)

Author Topic

Carmen Estacado
Caldari
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:06:00 - [151]
 

Great to hear about the new epic arcs!

Yeah, I know, EVE is a MMORPG. But when the day is long and the inner- and intercorp drama is thick it's nice to forget about the MMO part for a while and focus on some solo RPG... and unfortunately the existing regular missions are highly repetitive.

Sad news about Walking in Stations not making it into the winter expansion though.

CCP Explorer

Posted - 2009.07.01 18:45:00 - [152]
 

Originally by: Gil Danastre
So with the mini expansion titled Apocrypha 1.5, does this imply there will be a 1.4 in the time between now and then? If so, will it include the oft delayed scanning fixes? Very Happy
Think of it this way: Apocrypha 1.4 (version number) is Apocrypha "1.5" (name).

The version number of Apocrypha 1.5 will be 6.14. Apocrypha 1.5 is the next scheduled release and it will contain scanning fixes.

Tiger's Spirit
Caldari
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:48:00 - [153]
 

Edited by: Tiger''s Spirit on 01/07/2009 18:49:55
Originally by: Wrayeth
Originally by: Mercostol
the new rigs add a new problem also.
we need a dedicated ship hauler. give it 1million m3 of space for ships and a small cargo bay. orca costs or cheaper would be nice


These already exist. They're called carriers. Laughing

Also, thank you CCP for giving black ops a fuel bay at last! I knew there was a reason I trained black ops 5! (Aside from the additional 30% jam strength on my armor-tanked and trimarked widow.)


Fuel bay ? :D "We are introducing a system that allows us to author specialized cargo holds on ships."

Just see it when the CCP introduce for you low slot fuel cargo bay. Laughing

Kerdrak
GreenSwarm
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.07.01 18:54:00 - [154]
 

So we have to buy 2 new sets of BPO to produce the smaller rigs?

Ashina Sito
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.07.01 19:13:00 - [155]
 

Originally by: CCP Explorer
Apocrypha 1.5 is the next scheduled release and it will contain scanning fixes.


Finally, thank you.

Raimo
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.07.01 19:40:00 - [156]
 

Originally by: Kelron Queldine
Originally by: Raimo
Originally by: Kelron Queldine
What's the reasoning behind handing out extra rewards for faction warfare kills beyond what everyone else gets out of PvP (i.e. loot and fun)? I'm fine with them getting some rewards for plex capture, because that will go some way towards turning them into the PvP battles I assume they were intended to be, but I don't understand why they need extra rewards for kills.


Hehe, pirate tears! :P


It's hayfever.

Serious question though, I'd like to know why CCP think direct LP for kills is needed. LP for plex capture without LP for kills would in fact encourage the FW gangs to capture plexes rather than have roaming blobs. It may even be possible to scale the LP rewards depending on the level of defense, so capturing an undefended plex is worth less than capturing it after a fleet fight.


Hayfever. :P

TBH I'd like both like announced in the OP. "Other" PVPers can feel free to join one of the FW factions to get their share...

Do keep in mind that much of the 0.0 PVP is anyway indirectly to gain ISK, at least "officially". FW does not have such a thing.

- And I know neither do pirates or hisec war deccers etc but TBH I think this change will be a great way to revitalize FW... By (hopefully) introducing blobreduction mechanics to the rewards they could even improve the lives of those low sec inhabitants that opt to stay outside of the militias.

(Here's hoping for pirate FW factions as well!)

Infinion
Caldari
Awesome Corp
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:05:00 - [157]
 

could you possibly include giving covert ops the ability to ship scan while cloaked for the upcoming mini-expansion?

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:07:00 - [158]
 

Edited by: Barbara Nichole on 01/07/2009 20:09:37


I like the idea of special cargo holds on paper...if it leads to an improvement of the size over what we have now. If it doesn't, it's just adding complexity for complexities sake and that would be bad.

As for rig sizes, am I the only person here whose nerf sensors went off after viewing the announcement? No nerfs are going to be added...this time. But since the largest sized rigs are the rigs we've already got, how difficult would it be to start limiting what size rig will fit in what ship? If you introduce larger rigs than we already have that's no big deal...a limitation might even make sense... but leaving things at status quo and adding the rigged sizes opens the door to allowing only sub standard rigs in say cruisers or frigs ..While requiring the more expensive rigs to fit a larger ship with no real advantage over what we have now.

I hate being pestimistic.. but I've played too many mmos.
Be careful what you ask for... you might get it.





Brique
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:49:00 - [159]
 

Originally by: Nyphur
Originally by: Fon Revedhort
Originally by: Nyphur
The only problem is with people who bought the rigs for the full price before the patch and will be annoyed that they could have waited and bought a cheaper version after the patch that would do the same job.
After this news announcement with over a month of warning, I think anyone buying an expensive rig for a small ship knows full well what they're getting in for.

But it is a serious problem.
This effectively stoles my isk, since the ship is worth its price plus the rigs, and rigs are all of a sudden getting halved or even quartered in price (or whatever).

That's a total crap.

I've bolded the eroneous part. The ship COST you the value of the ship and rigs but that's not what it's worth because there is no way for you to get that value back. As rigs can't be removed, they're only worth the bonus to your ship. They have no resaleability and thus no resale value. As long as that bonus doesn't change, your ship will be functionally identical in every way, shape and form before and after the change.

You have a month to lose your expensive ship in PvP or sell it to someone who will. That should be plenty of time to solve the issue if you're really bothered about the isk you spent on those rigs. Or is it that you just want CCP to magically fix it so you can keep using your overpriced ship and then sell the rigs when the patch hits? You can't have your cake and eat it too.


I've bought and sold rigged ships through contracts several times. They are worth more than their unrigged counterparts on the market. So, the earlier comment is not erroneous. Cheaper rigs will devalue existing rigged ships if the bonuses are held constant.

Personally, I don't see why they wouldn’t simply make the small and medium sized rigs cheaper to make with smaller bonuses, without bothering to restrict them by class size. If you want to put a 5% Cap control circuit on a battleship, go ahead. If you want to put a 15 million ISK "large" rig on your Rifter (just like you can now), go ahead. The advantage to small and medium rigs need only be that they are more cost-appropriate for the cheaper ships. Effectively, it would be more like meta levels for rigs, rather than class sizes.

Kessiaan
Minmatar
Vagrants Inc
Posted - 2009.07.01 20:56:00 - [160]
 

Edited by: Kessiaan on 01/07/2009 20:56:17
Originally by: Brique
I've bought and sold rigged ships through contracts several times. They are worth more than their unrigged counterparts on the market. So, the earlier comment is not erroneous. Cheaper rigs will devalue existing rigged ships if the bonuses are held constant.

Personally, I don't see why they wouldn’t simply make the small and medium sized rigs cheaper to make with smaller bonuses, without bothering to restrict them by class size. If you want to put a 5% Cap control circuit on a battleship, go ahead. If you want to put a 15 million ISK "large" rig on your Rifter (just like you can now), go ahead. The advantage to small and medium rigs need only be that they are more cost-appropriate for the cheaper ships. Effectively, it would be more like meta levels for rigs, rather than class sizes.



I don't see what the issue is, really, so long as the bonuses are the same. I got loads of rigged AFs and inties, and I'm all for cheaper rigs so long as the bonus stays constant.

As for the ships I already have - I already spent the money. It was worth it then and this announcement doesn't somehow make it retroactively not worth it. Now for rigging future ships, I might wait, but then again, I might not.

Hamish Grayson
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:04:00 - [161]
 

Edited by: Hamish Grayson on 01/07/2009 21:07:03
Edited by: Hamish Grayson on 01/07/2009 21:05:16
You say this:

Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans
We have several new epic mission arcs, which unlike the level 1 epic arc we introduced in Apocrypha are all level 4, meaning they will be more challenging, but also more rewarding. With each themed around a specific race, these captivating stories deal with moral ambiguity, intrigue, honor and some people's lack of it. This should come as no surprise to those who know EVE and what we are about.


and I hear

Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans
We are going to be introducing a world of warcraft style questing system and marketing it as something new and epic. This should come as no surprise to those who know CCP and what we are about these days.


I guess true innovation might risk profit margins. I miss CCP of 2004 Sad

Kurfin
Amarr
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:28:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Nova Satar
if it pushes the price of rigs up even more then im emo quitting

a good fit bs costs way to ****ing much as it is!

Confused


I'd guess it will push prices up as more rigs used, even if they are only small, means more demand for salvage pushing it's price up. However rigs for smaller ships will mean greater variety for those who fly them, and newer players can start experimenting with rigs for less money. It's bring rigs to the people!

And any initial surge in price of large rigs/salvage will be short lived as people will start salvaging more, until the price comes down again. I suspect the large rigs might settle a little bit above what they are now, but not a huge increase compared to the cost of a well fitted BS.

Franga
NQX Innovations
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:29:00 - [163]
 

Rig feature sounds excellent. Shame that we won't be walking in the next full expansion, though.

Ankhesentapemkah
Gallente
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:29:00 - [164]
 

Woot, quite a few things can be crossed off the CSM backlog now! Rigs, Blackops, Factional Warfare...

You guys rock!

Deva Blackfire
Viziam
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:31:00 - [165]
 

So you removing the stupid SP loss from dying in t3 ship? Or should i wait few more years before i buy skillbooks?

Masada Akiva
Gallente
Tribe Research and Development
Posted - 2009.07.01 21:49:00 - [166]
 

Edited by: Masada Akiva on 01/07/2009 21:49:36
I have to admit that I am disappointed to hear there will be no walking avatars in 2009 (assuming the winter release is the last in 2009). After 4 years of playing Eve there are few innovative game features in these "expansions". Simply adding more ships, tweaking guns, and altering 0.0 pvp mechanics is starting to feel repetitive. I have really enjoyed wormhole features and T3 customizable cruisers. I hope you can reconsider bringing avatars back in.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:03:00 - [167]
 

Originally by: Myyona
How is the saying? "EVE isn't about being fair."

If YOU do not compensate the tackler for helping you out then you will properly not have many tacklers helping you out for much longer. This will encourage people to spread out to roam solo or in small packs with trusted friends, that is all we need.


There's a difference between eve not enforcing perfect fairness, and deliberately designing a game mechanic to distribute rewards unfairly.

What you suggest might work, but would lead to one of several things:

1) Tacklers would have to wait for a cash-out they have no control over, and no way of verifying if the damage-dealer is giving them a fair deal
2) Damage-dealers have to have a stack of isk on hand to pay the tacklers up front
3) You put in a system that lets people transfer LP in the same way they transfer isk.

Certainly possible, but I think the straight split of LP's in the first place would be simpler.

Originally by: fuze
It also can be an advantage. If swads of ISK farmers start doing FW you can shoot them everywhere and get LP for it as well. Knowing nothing about PvP they will be sitting ducks anyway.


But the FW-farming characters are unlikely to swan around the place for you to shoot, and certainly won't be the same characters farming other areas of the game.

They only need to be in space long enough to blow up the alt's ship, which they can do quite happily at a safespot. The rest of the time (and any time they see hostiles) they'll be nicely docked up or cloaked.

While in theory you can shoot them, in practice any half-competent farmer is going to make it extremely difficult for you to get in the position to.

Originally by: Nyphur
But as someone else already pointed out, if there's ANY value, it will raise the floor price for insurance fraud and impact the mineral markets unduely.


That would have been me, in the same post Wink

Originally by: Nyphur
Restricted technology:<snip>


Interesting idea, gives the FW players the supply of war materiel directly, rather than giving them the isk stream to fund it (which I suspect is the whole reason for the LP Store idea in the first place). Only 2 disadvantages I can think of for this approach:

1) Reduces the industrial demand generated by FW - by supplying the items direct you remove the need for the industrial chain to supply your militia. Would still be bad for the market, just in the other direction to the farming case. This is why the current LP Store offers always require the Meta 0 equivalent item as part of the price of the offer. The LP store would need to be more of an upgrade program rather than a direct item dispenser.

2) Still farmable if the returns per kill are too good. Having to be in the militia to use the farmed items would limit the impact a bit, but cheap faction stuff in exchange for a few more people being able to shoot you is going to seem like a good deal to a lot of people, especially if they operate in areas where they know there won't be large concentrations of FW players.

Originally by: Nyphur
Licenses:<snip>


The militia-based functions to give FW-specific advantages certainly sound like something worth exploring. But again need to bear in mind that they are not just a reward for being successful, but can be "bought" by any player willing to sacrifice enough ships using their alt.

Originally by: Nyphur
Cheap clones


Would need to keep an eye on the effect it has on clone costs as an isk sink, but otherwise not bad.

Originally by: Nyphur
Direct implantation


I like this idea the best, again a flaw is the potential for FW players to "buy" these by blowing up their alt's ships rather than earning them through proper FW play.

However...

Idara
Caldari
Queens of the Stone Age
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:05:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: Masada Akiva
Edited by: Masada Akiva on 01/07/2009 21:49:36
I have to admit that I am disappointed to hear there will be no walking avatars in 2009 (assuming the winter release is the last in 2009). After 4 years of playing Eve there are few innovative game features in these "expansions". Simply adding more ships, tweaking guns, and altering 0.0 pvp mechanics is starting to feel repetitive. I have really enjoyed wormhole features and T3 customizable cruisers. I hope you can reconsider bringing avatars back in.


Yeah, a (supposedly) total overhaul of one of the biggest player driven part of the game is TOTALLY not worth doing over walking around in a jumpsuit.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:08:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
You need MORE trade and FREE trade to make FW more successful. You must not make it a closed user group, that would be really bad.


This is the main flaw in all the above proposals.

While I think some of the ideas might be workable, they make the LP Store something other than what it needs to be.

The main problem I see with FW is that FW as a playstyle cannot fund itself. I believe CCP's intention with the LP Store is to give FW players a funding stream. Again, only two ways I can see that working:

1) LP Store gives stuff they can sell to the rest of Eve. Comes with all the farming issues already highlighted.

2) LP Store dispenses the materiel directly with whatever item binding and restrictions necessary to stop it becoming a resale-fest. This would effectively disconnect the FW bubble from the rest of Eve economically. As FW players are not disconnected from the rest of the Eve system, this is highly undesirable. Has the potential to make FW membership the route to cheap stuff in exchange for being under a wardec, which many people won't care about anyway.

I don't think either solution is particularly desirable.

Originally by: Raimo
TBH if balanced right I don't see some ISK- tradable stuff being a bad thing. Those FW players won't be grinding their lvl4's (like many do), instead they will be out in low sec killing and maybe even plexing... Probably making less per hour but hopefully enough overall to entice them to stay at it.


That's the trick though. To be "balanced right", the LP Store offers would need to balance against both the rate of LP accumulation and the shifting of market prices. I can't see how that could be done without a Dev monitoring and altering the store offers on a very regular basis (automated systems are out because market prices are so easy to manipulate).

Originally by: Nyphur
EDIT: Or am I worrying too much over something that isn't important? Does it matter that the cost of losing our ships will increase to completely offset the LP gained from killing one? Could it actually be a good thing for EVE that tech 1 ships become more expensive to lose after insurance?


The problem is that the Tech 1 ships become more expensive because the minerals to make them become more expensive. And thus pretty much everything in eve becomes more expensive, for everyone.

The incomes from other professions will, in general, not increase to match, hence you will directly nerf any profession that does not directly benefit from the higher mineral prices (i.e. pretty much everything apart from mining).

It also means that you won't get a proper supply & demand behaviour from the market. Instead of prices and supply fluctuating naturally, instead the level of FW-store farming will fluctuate up and down to maintain the floor price. Hence the price signalling mechanism from the market, which keeps the whole economy working efficiently, gets broken.

Originally by: Havok Pierce
What about placing the reward for a kill as dependent on the target's kill/death ratio, modified by the # of people in on the kill? The better players become more valuable for a kill (as they appear more dangerous), and the cannon-fodder alt becomes less and less valuable.


Just means you need 2 alts for the LP-fraud. Use Alt1 to kill Alt2 loads of times so Alt1 has a really high kill/death ratio. Then kill Alt1 with Main to get loads of LP.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:21:00 - [170]
 

Originally by: Kelron Queldine
What's the reasoning behind handing out extra rewards for faction warfare kills beyond what everyone else gets out of PvP (i.e. loot and fun)? I'm fine with them getting some rewards for plex capture, because that will go some way towards turning them into the PvP battles I assume they were intended to be, but I don't understand why they need extra rewards for kills.


I know what you're getting at, however it all centers around CCP's vision that fights as part of professions should be about something, not just two people randomly shooting each other (which while perfectly permitted, is not designed to be a self-sufficient occupation).

e.g. Piracy as a profession isn't just randomly ganking people, it's picking off targets with cargo and loot worthy of the bother to attack it.

0.0 wars are closer to the FW case though, as they are fights over territory. They are both motivated by, and funded by, the resources that territory makes available. The important thing to note here is that it's not the fight itself that earns isk, it's the profession activity that the fight enables by ensuring access to the relevant resources. Thus the fighting improves the earning potential of your profession teams (at least for the victor!). It is this improved earning potential that both precipitates the fight, and helps fund it.

FW is similarly designed as fundamentally a fight over territory, not just a set of stand-alone PvP battles. The problem is that it's motivation is different, and success does not yield material benefits to replace the resources expended.

In fact, following this line of thinking suggests to me that LP for kills is probably the wrong way to drive rewards in FW to begin with, even if you could make it non-farmable. Instead, the rewards, or at least resources from which rewards can be generated, should be tied to the territorial element of FW.

The trick is to do this in a balanced way. Obviously there is a limit to the rewards you can dish out for just sitting next to a beacon for the specified amount of time.

Not entirely clear in my head how that would work, and it's too late at night for me to figure out now, but am thinking along the lines of stealing the escalation mechanic from exploration sites. So a captured FW site would offer an escalation to the capturing team, which would offer the reward-generating resources in response to your control of the territory.

Originally by: Nyphur
Instead of direct LP for kills, we could get LP for captures but extra for capturing plexes in which kills were made.


Hello roaming gang of alts ready to die a glorious death in every FW plex that's captured.

Having to kill the alt in an FW plex rather than wherever they like really isn't that big a barrier to LP-fraud.

Matthew
Caldari
BloodStar Technologies
Posted - 2009.07.01 22:28:00 - [171]
 

Branching off for a bit, have had a thought about specialist cargo holds as well.

In principle, great idea. Gives a lot more flexibility for ships to carry around quantities of what they need, without becoming substitute haulers for things they don't.

Only thing I'm wary of is that if you go too over the top on the capacity of these specialist holds, then you end up with these ships replacing the job of haulers for those specialist items. Which probably means specialty cargo holds no larger than 10-20k, unless they are on a deliberate specialist hauling vessel

That situation would be analogous to not needing petrol tankers because the fuel tank on your car was bigger. But obviously it's fine for the purpose-built petrol tanker to hold more fuel than a transit-van full of jerry cans.

Hopefully a problem that can be easily avoided though Smile

ITTigerClawIK
Amarr
Galactic Rangers
Galactic-Rangers
Posted - 2009.07.02 00:34:00 - [172]
 

Quote:
Specialized Cargo holds - Fuel bays on black ops We are introducing a system that allows us to author specialized cargo holds on ships. We will start by adding fuel bays on black ops and possibly other ships. This means we‘re adding more space for your fuel, without the ships becoming horribly unbalanced haulers of death. The technology behind this opens up doors to making other types of bays, just for ammo, just for livestock or whatever. Those options will be explored in future expansions.


so does this mean something along the lines off ships being standerdised with

Normal Cargohold - Normal loot and the like

Ammo Bay - Charges and boosters im pretty sure alot of people have been looking for that

Passengers - meaning the damsel in distress will no longer be some fat ***** taking a crap load of room forcing me to jettison another bit of loot i wanted

Fuel bay- for black ops/jump capable capitals

VonBlau
Posted - 2009.07.02 00:44:00 - [173]
 

FIX THE LOWSEC LAG for gods sake. we had a 80 man engagement in low sec tonight and we couldnt even see if we were still alive or dead, activate guns etc etc, also were looping like our ship had been destroyed but did not end up in the pod. 3-4 client restarts and the same damn thing..over and over.

why the hell should i play this game if im not able to have small engagements in lowsec..nvm the 1000 man 0.0 stuff.
throw that walking in stations stuff in the recycle bin for now and make the pvp experience more smooth.
please.

Kelron Queldine
Beyond Divinity Inc
Excuses.
Posted - 2009.07.02 01:05:00 - [174]
 

Originally by: Matthew
Originally by: Kelron Queldine
What's the reasoning behind handing out extra rewards for faction warfare kills beyond what everyone else gets out of PvP (i.e. loot and fun)? I'm fine with them getting some rewards for plex capture, because that will go some way towards turning them into the PvP battles I assume they were intended to be, but I don't understand why they need extra rewards for kills.


I know what you're getting at, however it all centers around CCP's vision that fights as part of professions should be about something, not just two people randomly shooting each other (which while perfectly permitted, is not designed to be a self-sufficient occupation).

etc



Apart from the roleplay aspect of FW, it's already a kind of soft option for getting into PvP. You can get regular fights without either moving to 0.0 or losing your high sec access. No other form of PvP has direct rewards for kills past the loot and occasional bounties and I don't see why FW should be any different. I agree with what you say about territorial control, and if CCP want to incentivise FW it should be done in a way that encourages fighting over systems rather than just fighting for the sake of it.

Shamrock1
Caldari
McWOOKIE'S REVOLOUTION
Posted - 2009.07.02 01:30:00 - [175]
 

Cool new rigs, but if you think about it it will drive ship prices up cuz every one is rigging ships! Food for thoughtCool

Jazmyne Lee
Posted - 2009.07.02 02:41:00 - [176]
 

Ok Love idea of small rigs, there few things i was hoping to see in eve-online soon.

I guss i am a solo nomand player of types i liek to fly alone alot. when i started like 3 years ago was easy to do less people and the scanning system was not so great.

Now days flying solo is just asking to get ya butt kicked every few days.

Most games i play are like fallout3 and C&c. few things i am missing in eve are being able to lay a trap. i mean a traps that a solo player can use we started with warp bubbles. ware theses mines or web bubbles or cap mines or somthing you can lunch that stuffs up scanners so solo players go back to running level4's in low sec and leve5's without risk of having 15 ships warp in on a solo or small group of ships. There is a reason people run missions so thioney dont have to pvp i would like to see the tools so a solo player can fight back maybe in the from of being about to take out a jamming system on a ship or damage there guns maybe a heat mine. given all the tools to pvper and nuthing to missions runners.

p.s. i have a bad phone line can you please let people tractor a drone we can tractor a carrior wreck but not a drone come on man. subsystem damage is more inporten then mini rigs.

Qinoly
Gallente
Avib VOV
Posted - 2009.07.02 04:03:00 - [177]
 

Edited by: Qinoly on 02/07/2009 04:11:52
Small, med and Large will be affiliated with frigs, cruiser and Battleship size.
Think the names are wrong, unless you want the current rigs to be incompatible with the ships they are fitted to right now.

Originally by: Jazmyne Lee
p.s. i have a bad phone line can you please let people tractor a drone we can tractor a carrior wreck but not a drone come on man. subsystem damage is more inporten then mini rigs.

This is a good one, but the solution doesn't go far enough.
When a miner in a barge or exhumer crashes due to whatever, he warps back into the belt and finds his drones no longer to be controlable, need to fly to your drones to scoop 'm 1 by 1 everytime a crash happens ? Oh please.. the drones still know who they belong to, why not have them respond to 'return to drone bay' ?



On a general note : CCP is making the game easier for new players with many 'improvements', Why ?
To get into a Cruiser at the start of eve, required to mine out entire belts with just a tiny frigate with 2 normal lasers.
The fact that new players can now be in a cruiser within a few days, skill as well as money wise is absurd.
New pilots get more money faster then ever before.
Lvl 4 missions were not possible for a character of just 3 months old before, now we have Drakes that can be flown by those new players and they can actually go in such missions and survive, is also absurd.
To get access to lvl 4 agents took what ? .. A year to get the standing ?
Sure go ahead and simplify the game even more however keep in mind that the faster new players get the fancy stuff, the more you are scr*wing older players who started in 2003

Right.. flame on, hope to also see replies from the older characters and not just 1 year olds.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.07.02 05:44:00 - [178]
 

Edited by: Gnulpie on 02/07/2009 05:46:01
Concerning LP for FW kills

After reading several ideas and replies I think that the idea to get LP's for (player) kills in FW is a bad idea. Full of unfairness however you implement it and even more so it would be so very prone to abuse for farming LP.

But there needs to be ways to improve FW and make it also financially some sort of profit. You have shiplosses, you have to earn isk which is currently not the case.

So maybe give more LP to those people who capture FW complexes and even more so, systems.

Maybe the whole militia can earn LP for holding their own system (few LP there only) and enemy systems (more LP there) each day. The more LP the militia has, the better it should be for the players: for example the items in the LP-store could become cheaper if the militia has more LP available. Or there could be a daily isk payout to the (active) pilots in the militia based on how much LP the militia has.

But what FW is really lacking is some organisational structure. Corps who can gain control over a system and the militia to a certain degrees - VICEROYS.

Hun Jakuza
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming
Posted - 2009.07.02 07:15:00 - [179]
 

Edited by: Hun Jakuza on 02/07/2009 07:34:40
Another bad move : rigs, specialized cargo holds.

We have in game, over 200 rigs why increasing the laggy database again with useless idea ?
Today the rigs working fine, not need changes. +400 unnecessary items, new rig bonuses, new industry/research jobs in database just generating more lags.
The game for new players will be more complicated.

I know CCP thinking. Small,med,large rigs will give to players different bonuses. Small rigs will need much less raw material but give to players, less bonuses, like the implants 1%,3%,5%.
For frigates this rigs will useless, small ships have small attributes +1% for example frigate 500 shield will increase +5hp. So useless. Med for cruiser and BCs ? I foresee that they stain already the drake pilots to cry, nerfing down their field purger rigs.

Specialized cargoholds: Ships need for this changes new slots, like rig slots, because if ships need for the new cargo modules low slots, the applicability of the spaceships will reduce only with it.


Fw: Faction war is unplayeable. Reason is the lag.
Players cant fight in 10vs10 battle, because the CCP move their server capacity to 0.0. 10vs10 battle in FW same that than there 0.0 in 1000 pilots of battle.
We said many times for CCP, pls fix the lag, but nothing changed at least 1 year ago.

The FW play need revision too. Who found it for example, onto the hostile station in there may be docking up an enemy ship ?
Capture systems give the players nothing. It's too boring.

GodI'mBeautiful
Posted - 2009.07.02 07:20:00 - [180]
 

LP store in FW is excellent, although I think only the lag really needed fixing.
Rig sizes and existing rigs will be large rigs: good for all those who wanna rig their rifters and thashers. Should be a bit of a boost to beginner pvp.
Epic Arcs in level 4: Nice for everyone, from missioners to ninjas.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 : last (10)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only