open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Capital Ships In Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 ... : last (62)

Author Topic

Fire Hawk
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:37:00 - [1111]
 

Quote:
"Titans"

As stated in the blog, Titans primary role should not be direct damage. We still feel like they need more defined roles, this will be worked on along with proper Mothership changes.


So you dont mind giving us 2 useless class of ships for 6 month? they also happened to be the 2 most expensive? Why cant a "SUPER CAPITAL" outdamage a regular capital? this is truely ******ed, everyone is telling you yet you choose not to listen.

lord cyrez
Caldari
xell network seven
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:38:00 - [1112]
 

first: i have to admit that i'm not too familiar with the recent turret/tracking formular changes - but my understanding is, that if the target does not move, the turrets sigresolution does not alter the equation, thus ships signature radius is no issue at all - as long as it doesnt move?

since no movement is the case for sieged dreads, the main target for other dreads, turrets presumably always hit for full damage?


anyway - i'm one of the shafted phoenix pilots, so i crunched the numbers for missiles.

-25% Signature Radius derived from a spec'd Claymore pilot.
-37.5% Signature Radius derived from a spec'd Ragnarok pilot.


Citadel Torpedo Explosion Radius: 2,250m
Ship/POS SigRadius Sig/ExpRadius -25% SIG -37.5% SIG
Revelation 1700 -24% -43% -53%
Phoenix 1770 -21% -41% -51%
Moros 1740 -23% -42% -52%
Naglfar 1635 -27% -45% -55%
Small POS 1000 -55% N/A N/A
Medium POS 2000 -11% N/A N/A
Large POS 4000 full dmg N/A N/A



Citadel Cruise Explosion Radius: 1,500m
Ship/POS SigRadius Sig/ExpRadius -25% SIG -37.5% SIG
Revelation 1700 full dmg -15% -29%
Phoenix 1770 full dmg -11% -26%
Moros 1740 full dmg -13% -27%
Naglfar 1635 full dmg -18% -32%
Small POS 1000 -33% N/A N/A
Medium POS 2000 full dmg N/A N/A
Large POS 4000 full dmg N/A N/A


so... shooting torps at any dread will net me -21% to -27% anyway?
a fifth to a quarter of my damage will *always* be lost?

and if the enemy fleet has some evasive maneuvers ganglink in it, maybe even on a non-minmatar command ship, i lose -41% to -45%?

a ragnarok doesnt show up that often, but might become flavored with this change, and would make things even worse. -51% to -55%. having any sig radius reduction going on within your enemy fleet encourages phoenix pilots to stay home and... dunno, spank NPCs.


if my assumption about turrets is true (sig radius irrelevant if target is stationary), theres no wonder why naglfar and phoenix pilots are checking in for the front row of your nerfbat roundhouse kick.


so... did you, nozh, or your associates, even run the numbers on this?
dreads shooting dreads while losing at least 20% damage anyway?

is this intended?
if yes: seriously... just reduce the torp base damage and adjust the explosion radius. easier calculations for the server, if you like torp users to be mitigated in damage anyway.

Mioelnir
Minmatar
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:39:00 - [1113]
 

Originally by: casai
i like how they say were going to continue to talk to players

They are free to do so, the likelihood of someone talking back just drops by the hour.


And I repeat my previously asked questions:
- who are you?
- what have you done to the Game Design Department at CCP?
- do you demand a ransom?

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:43:00 - [1114]
 

Originally by: lord cyrez
so... did you, nozh, or your associates, even run the numbers on this?
dreads shooting dreads while losing at least 20% damage anyway?

is this intended?


Yeah sure it is! Just use target painters on those pos and sieged dreads and voila ... you'll have your full damage. Oh wait ... Rolling Eyes

lord cyrez
Caldari
xell network seven
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:46:00 - [1115]
 

Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: lord cyrez
so... did you, nozh, or your associates, even run the numbers on this?
dreads shooting dreads while losing at least 20% damage anyway?

is this intended?


Yeah sure it is! Just use target painters on those pos and sieged dreads and voila ... you'll have your full damage. Oh wait ... Rolling Eyes


oops sorry, totally forgot about target painters.

feel free to adjust any of my numbers by about 0% Laughing ugh

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:47:00 - [1116]
 

Originally by: Kraken Kill
Just do this.

Motherships Get Dread Jump range.
Motherships get 20 Drones at Lvl 5 carrier.
Citadel torps AND Cruise get 1500 Explosion Radius, Torps (and compact get roughly 60ms explo velocity).
Motherships get a EHP buff.
Fighter Bombers (with 20 fighter bombers and lvl 5 fighter bomber) do roughly 8000 dps+
Motherships cant dock
Motherships dont get build costs reduced
Motherships lose triage and clone vat to balance the increased damage.

Titans Get 5minute DD timer.
Titans get the same damage as 2-3 Dreads (8-12k dps) with lvl 5 Titan.

Naglfars dont get a split weapon bonus (the dread with 4! weapons should be doing the most damage. Currently the Nags artys with EMP (20 shots) has to reload every 5 mins, which is sooner than every other dread and it requires carrying more ammo types).

Phoenix should get a 5% ROF damage bonus and a 5% bonus to ALL missile damage types.
Cit Cruise and torps should have 1500m explo raduis, being make smaller with skills for the cruise so they are effective against large pos mods and small pos. Right now Turret ships can still hit medium and small pos mods for massive damage while missile dreads FAIL extremely FAIL at this.

Do this and ALL problems will go away. Everything will be good. Harmony will spread out among the player base.

This is TESTED BY THE PLAYERBASE and everyone was in agreement. Only your shortsighted Egomania felt that Capships being used aggressively was a bad idea.

Also- I think you are out of line starting your post with a 'Lets see' as if the players are all idiots and have missed something.

You CANNOT impliment ANY of these Titan changes if you are going to leave motherships as they are.
You have also forgotten to do any work on Triage- It was said originally that Triage duration would be cut to 5mins and strontium consumption would be reduced.

Why you feel Torpedos need something so bizarre as a 3000+ explo radius ive no clue, you are terrible for causing more problems with your problem ideas.



/signed

Also, are you guys getting the hint? All the major 0.0 alliances are argreeing with each other (for once), hell even people are agreeing with Mittani and that is scary.

I still want to ask

Where is TomB??



We need you Obi Wan-CCP TomB and CCP Arbithar

Vadinho
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:51:00 - [1117]
 

Edited by: Vadinho on 20/11/2009 19:51:00
too bad the assembly hall Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. mechanic doesnt work in this subforum or thered be a string of them behind kraken kill's post

Toman Torax
Rage For Order
Nihil-Obstat
Posted - 2009.11.20 19:54:00 - [1118]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh
Let's see...

"Target Painters Do NOT Work on Titans, Supercaps, Structures, or Sieged Caps"

On Titans and Supercapitals that doesn't matter as their Signature Radius is already very large to begin with. Dreadnoughts and Carriers have the ability to enter Siege mode / Triage mode; both modules vastly increase your tanking and in this case the amount of damage they receive. Thus the large explosion radius scales the damage dealt to capital ships.

The Citadel Torpedoes don't do their full potential damage to Dreadnoughts, however they were balanced to do similar amounts of damage towards Dreadnoughts as XL Turrets with this in mind. Citadel Torpedoes have the ability to do more damage to larger targets.

To illustrate how it would have worked with Fighter Bombers, you can take a look at these graphs:

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.



"Capital ship fights rarely if ever happen at short distances."

What I meant by this is that there aren't many situations where you get to fully utilize the short range weapons (especially the "6x2500mm Repeating Artillery I" and "Ion Siege Blaster Cannon I"), due to their poor optimal range and the fact that you can't dictate range while in siege mode. With high damage ammo on Tranquility, your damage output starts dropping rapidly at ~5km, in which case you might as well use the long range weapons.


"Docking games"

We can all agree that docking games are, well, lame. But this problem is across all ship classes, regardless of their hit-point count. Thus, this problem has to be solved by some other means than to limit docking for the capital fatties. We'd like to work on other solutions for this problem.


"Titans"

As stated in the blog, Titans primary role should not be direct damage. We still feel like they need more defined roles, this will be worked on along with proper Mothership changes.

Serious and simple question - CCP PLEASE ANSWER THIS:

What was wrong with the changes Abathur proposed, which were tested, seemed fair and balanced, and were generally accepted?

Aizu Intaki
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:00:00 - [1119]
 

The mechanics changes aside (I don't have the experience in game to address them in an informed manner), I'm bothered by the apparent lack of process behind them. From the outside it seems like one guy (CCP Nozh) is essentially imposing his personal reasoning on long informed and publicly tested changes to caps and supercaps in 0.0. From the outside it seems there is very little review of his directives, as evidenced by the apparent lack of understanding on how his changes are misguided, and would thusly be abused. Examples seem to include: Not foreseeing the station hugging that would happen with dockable supercarriers under the new sov system, and not convincingly understanding why the inability to target paint supercaps and caps in triage/siege mode imbalances the new cap weapon system proposals.

The net effect is to significantly lower confidence in CCP's development process. Were these changes not vetted before being announced and/or pushed to test? If so, why? Were these changes vetted and no one simply noticed the more obvious issues with them? That may even be worse, to be honest.

Explain, please; restore confidence in the process.

---

Advice to fix the current "EW doesn't work on supercaps" issue you've gotten yourself into: Make supercaps, and caps in triage/siege mode immune to all EW *except* target painters. Keep in mind, this is coming from a cap/supercap/0.0 noob, but I think you'll find it fixes that particular bugbear you've stumbled into.

Jonathan Priest
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:00:00 - [1120]
 

Originally by: CCP Nozh

On Titans and Supercapitals that doesn't matter as their Signature Radius is already very large to begin with. Dreadnoughts and Carriers have the ability to enter Siege mode / Triage mode; both modules vastly increase your tanking and in this case the amount of damage they receive. Thus the large explosion radius scales the damage dealt to capital ships.


umm this isn't true unless siege and triage give you an increased sig now. Unless you're talking about speed tanking caps???

Originally by: CCP Nozh

The Citadel Torpedoes don't do their full potential damage to Dreadnoughts, however they were balanced to do similar amounts of damage towards Dreadnoughts as XL Turrets with this in mind. Citadel Torpedoes have the ability to do more damage to larger targets.


Have you also considered the travel time of the missles (especialy the cruise) when balancing this?

Originally by: CCP Nozh

graphs



Ok, I've never flown a cap, but from what I've seen the only time a dread isn't in siege is when it's getting ready to leave (ie building cap, finishing off the last few hp of a tower) or fighting bs.

Since fighting bs won't be happening anymore (or at least I think that's your intention) I can't imagin a situation where a dread wouldn't be sieged when in combat. Please don't consider target painters when balancing capital weapons.

Originally by: CCP Nozh
But this problem is across all ship classes, regardless of their hit-point count


The outrage you got from your mothership changes was because it was more than a problem, it completely broke the new sov system by making outposts invincible.

Kalexander
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:06:00 - [1121]
 

All the pages in this thread really just go on to illustrate why we see even LESS communication between the development DEPARTMENT (yes I say department, anyone who thinks its just one dude in a cube F-ing everything up is ignorant) and the playerbase than we should. This is entirely too heated and shows lots of signs of misinformed users, and outright stupidity on BOTH ends really.

Yea, this dude who works at CCP signed in with a name Nozh on the forum, maybe he's a programmer, a producer, or a designer, or just a community monkey. All we really know about him for sure is that he is a representative of an agile methodology "scrum" team who's been working on this stuff. Maybe he doesn't play the game all that much and maybe when he got to work that day his boss told him to put this together so he figured "i know, i'll just use up some time with some dumb ass graphs" etc. And what we got is a really crappy dev post because of it.

But here are the Facts.

A. They don't like the direction of motherships... They are not biased.
B. We liked the direction of motherships... We are biased. (And it wasn't all championing and roses here either folks, not everyone was all that jazzed about the original changes presented by Abs either)

The players vision of the game CANNOT be the same vision as the developers. We see things through champagne coloured lenses, because WE are vested in them and we nerd rage when our expectations shift and change and our isk and our skillpoints go towards things we do not have control of in the end. We ultimately are only looking out for the immediacy, while the developers cannot be concerned with dudes dropping billions on motherships. They have to consider the long run.

Come on lets be honest, plenty of these dev blogs contain posts by some of the people even posting in here saying "Please dont do this yet, wait and do it right". Now here they are, taking a feature and actually doing what some of us suggested and we flame the **** out of them for it?

Now I just wish they would take the Dread changes and put them on hold as well....

Vadinho
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:10:00 - [1122]
 

Originally by: Kalexander
Come on lets be honest, plenty of these dev blogs contain posts by some of the people even posting in here saying "Please dont do this yet, wait and do it right". Now here they are, taking a feature and actually doing what some of us suggested and we flame the **** out of them for it?
the titan changes went though, the mothership ones didnt

this means a mothership will now be able to be killed by two, maybe three titan shots

that seems like a pretty glaring oversight

Jack Gilligan
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:10:00 - [1123]
 

Originally by: Toman Torax
And more post deletions...

Jesus H. Christ what a ****ing ****storm you have caused, CCP.


Mass deletions and bans as a response to a highly unpopular publisher decision did nothing to help SOE with the NGE. In fact their actions made it even worse. They went ahead anyway and lost 200,000 subscribers within months.

I see Dominion, as designed, being the "thin end of the wedge" with respect to a "NGE" of EVE, dumbing it down, nerfing it to death, so as to make it compatible with their "target audience" dream Dust514. I suspect that even more outrageous deadline driven changes to EVE will be forthcoming in the next months, Dominion is only the tip of the iceberg.

Again, making such changes to an existing, hardcore MMO, which EVE is and SWG was, in the interest of going after players that you DONT have is almost certainly going to cost you players that you DO have. SWG crashed from having well over 200,000 subscribers to a state where they could increase their subscriptions 5 fold and not get back half of that. Do you want to lose 200,000 EVE subscribers just to attract 5,000 "konsole kiddz" that will dump your game into the used bin at Gamestop 3 months later?

History can repeat itself when people choose to remain ignorant of it.

Vadinho
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:15:00 - [1124]
 

Edited by: Vadinho on 20/11/2009 20:15:55
Originally by: Catari Taga
Wow, 45 posts deleted alone while I was reading the last page. Yet the thread is still growing. At least Nozh is creating jobs for forum mods.
this thread would already be longer than the 'ccp doesnt know how nullsec works' thread from a few weeks back if they werent deleting pages of posts

Originally by: Hot Fudge
It will be funny if this thread becomes a thread of account cancellation copy and pastes, lol.
oh god do it do it

cpu939
Gallente
Volatile Nature
White Noise.
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:17:00 - [1125]
 

ccp you do know by deleting post that you are adding fuel to the fire, best way to get this over and done with is the adult way and tell us why you feel the changes to the moms should not happen other than its not what we want as the titan is not what you want but it is still going ahead is it due to the ninja nerf and the other threads. is it a case of you complain you don't get anything.

we want to know why you are now doing these changes after all the hours of test/feedback done by the players in order to help you is that so worng we spent time to try and help you and you kick us for it.

why are you not just going ahead with the changes then once out you can nerf them.

the changes to missiles is just wack.

there are load of us here doing post with information but you still have yet to tell us why your not doing these changes other then yes we wasted your time cos we changed our minds tought luck.

ccp be smart talk to us tell us what you want allow us to reply and not just dev blog that have wrong information in it

Fufinski
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:18:00 - [1126]
 

Originally by: Cedori
The amusing part IMO, they are deleting the posts of people who are posting that they are canceling.

Really? We truly have converted the EvE Forums into lokta.org, the circle is now complete.

It is obvious Nozh has no idea how the game operates, nor how cap/supercap battles happen. As such he should not be within 10,000km of any decision regarding caps/supercaps.


Maybe he's family to some CEO's I've had in different jobs. Maybe they're trying to can all the operation and move everything to MUD221 or whatever that other thing they're getting ready is called.

Tell us, were you ordered to do this by someone in CCP or are you doing this following orders from someone in the competition?

Kalexander
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:21:00 - [1127]
 

Originally by: Cedori
The amusing part IMO, they are deleting the posts of people who are posting that they are canceling.

Really? We truly have converted the EvE Forums into lokta.org, the circle is now complete.

It is obvious Nozh has no idea how the game operates, nor how cap/supercap battles happen. As such he should not be within 10,000km of any decision regarding caps/supercaps.


He probably doesn't. Lots of people who work on video games don't really play the project they're on. That doesn't mean the entire design team that settles on decisions is as clueless as he is though. One guy isn't given that much authority.

And yea, they probably delete those "i quit" posts because you and I both know those people are not really going to make good on it. They love this game still way to much to not at least see this through for a little while.

Darriele
Minmatar
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:22:00 - [1128]
 

Quoting SISIPI Nozah from his previous failed blog: "As we said, roles are what matter. With these changes we hope to achieve a more balanced battlefield and synergy between the players and village idiots."

But who are the "village idiots" because they are many and so far there is only one ?!

have to paste my account cancelation to. SOON™

Jack Gilligan
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:22:00 - [1129]
 

Originally by: Hot Fudge
It will be funny if this thread becomes a thread of account cancellation copy and pastes, lol.


Yeah, wish I'd pasted mine to Notepad. I had already canceled to take a month's break off as I said, as I am playing SWGEMU at the moment and was going to wait for Dominion to come out. But reading the Dev blogs of the past 2 weeks has pushed me towards not resubbing at all.

I got banned once on my way out the door from the NGE by posting that I would not resubscribe until Pre-NGE was reinstated and John Smedley was fired. I'm thinking that I won't want to consider coming back to EVE until Nozh is fired.

Well, maybe not fired, but at least demoted to something within his ability, such as CTRL+V'ing "Our logs show nothing" into petition responses.

I'm beginning to think that CCP expanded way too fast. They hired just any old "Dev" to bulk up their numbers and didn't have much of a screening for competence, as evidenced by Nozh's ignorant writings about capital fights.

Orgell Evaan
Minmatar
Tax Avoidance Through Alliterative Syndication
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:23:00 - [1130]
 

So my spending months training for a Nag is wasted; I have to go through the entire Amarr ship tree, and the Lasers tree, to be effective in cap combat? Wonderful. At least I haven't wasted time training for Carriers yet.



Buring your head in the sand and burying feedback helping with the New Pilot Experience, guys?

Eric Starym
Koshaku
Antaeus Combine
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:23:00 - [1131]
 

Edited by: Eric Starym on 20/11/2009 20:24:00
Originally by: Cedori

It is obvious Nozh has no idea how the game operates, nor how cap/supercap battles happen. As such he should not be within 10,000km of any decision regarding caps/supercaps.


Isn't that somewhere near Atlanta or Shanghai?

Dust needs help, Nozh is the right guy, assign him there!

Ker HarSol
Minmatar
Zip - I
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:27:00 - [1132]
 

Maybe we can have SOME numbers at least? Yes? Please?

Stop posting stupid assumptions which are anyway all wrong and stop posting those **** graphs!

Give numbers! Hard, solid facts. Numbers!

Start with the tracking of guns. Speed of the various missiles. Explosive velocity, radius. DD cooldown. Boni of the ships. And and and.


Give us something real instead of this irreal sort of rabble talk. What is a devblog for if not for giving information?? If I all need to pick it up from the test server my own anyway, I do not need any freaking blog.

Oh, and answer please: Why were Abathur's changes discarded? What was wrong with them?

Toman Torax
Rage For Order
Nihil-Obstat
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:27:00 - [1133]
 

Serious and simple question - CCP PLEASE ANSWER THIS:

What was wrong with the changes Abathur proposed, which were tested, seemed fair and balanced, and were generally accepted?

I'm going to keep posting this until it gets an answer. And for the love of God, it's doesn't have to be Nozh that answers it, because he has already shown that he has NO concept of how capital ships ACTUALLY OPERATE. Throwing spreadsheet stats around DOES NOT HELP - you have completely disproven your credibility by thinking that sieged dreads, supercaps, etc can be target painted, as well as all of your other banalities.

PLEASE, can SOMEONE in CCP answer my question above?

Sidus Sarmiang
GoonWaffe
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:33:00 - [1134]
 

Here's a post.


I want to offer a new perspective on what the original changes to supercaps would do for EVE. There are a variety of combat doctrines used in current alliance warfare. Current combat in EVE focuses on denial of resources (both in the form of R64s for the alliance space and ratting systems for individual members) and denial of space (in the form of capturing system after system) are the two major ones currently. Both share a common problem, they tend to be slow, as it is ultimately morale that causes one side or another to lose and this takes a long time to grind down.

Several years ago, however, there was a third doctrine which determined how wars would end as much as the other two. This was the idea of a decisive battle. The ASCN/LV/etc loss to RA in their home system with the destruction of several dreadnaughts, the ASCN titan death by BoB, and the abortion of LV's titan are good examples. Originally, the loss of a few dozen battleships or a handful of dreadnaughts could be considered decisive. This doctrine had a variety of advantages. It made warfare faster and more dynamic, it separated it somewhat from the resources either side could bring to bear (since even if one side was outnumbered, if they had more forces or more skill at the right time they could win the war ie RA), and it made for truly memorable and interesting experiences that shaped EVE's history. The closest I think we've come in the last year to that would be the battle which culminated in Kenzoku retreating to PR-, but even that was not decisive as Kenzoku et al were able to continue the fight several months longer.

The reason why this doctrine has disappeared is pretty simple. It's just no longer practical to field a sufficient number of ships that the resources of an alliance would be significantly effected by their loss in most cases. This is not true in all cases; a poor alliance using their entire cap fleet might open the possibility for a decisive battle, but cap fleets owned by alliances in this position are not risked because the potential gains do not justify the risks. At the most, the poor alliance could gain an R64 or defeat an enemy cap fleet to gain an advantage (but not win the war), but they could also lose everything. In a fight between two wealthy alliances, the possibility for a single decisive battle is remote enough to be considered absurd.

The changes to titans and motherships had the potential to change this around. With a tier of ships above dreadnaughts, the possibility of escalating a conflict above a mere capship fight became possible. Imagine an enemy is sieging your POS. You have engaged their subcap fleet, they responded by bringing in dreadnaughts and carriers, you countered them with a hotdrop. You have a slight advantage, but one large enough to win.

Up until the original plan for Dominion, that would've been the end of it. You would win the battle, an important battle, but odds are the war would continue. The titan and mothership changes introduced a new possibility and level to the conflict. Instead of the battle ending with your victory, another cyno opens and suddenly five of the enemy's titans and twice that many motherships supported by repping carriers drop onto the field. The risks and the rewards of the battle have changed. The possibility to lose your dreadnaught fleet in a spectacular manner now exists, but in return the enemy has given you the chance to destroy a good chunk of their supercapital force, which, due to the cost and long construction time, compounded by the lack of sov 4, would effectively destroy them. In order to take advantage of this, though, you have to risk your own supercapitals and the possibility of crippling your own alliance.

This is a hell of a lot more interesting than any type of warfare before it.

You had a chance to give us this.

Instead you want to give us super-rorquals and 18 billion isk titan-bait POS-huggers.

Not cool, dude, not cool.

Klisejo
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:36:00 - [1135]
 

Edited by: Klisejo on 20/11/2009 20:36:20
Look, the changes were fine. Just say you're sorry and you were wrong. We'll forgive you.

LegendaryFrog
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:36:00 - [1136]
 

I really encourage CCP to take a hard look at some of the constructive comments that are coming out of this topic. There is a consensus among the people who actually play in the 0.0 sov game as to how the mechanics of these ships (and sov, for the matter) should work in order to maximize the fun that can be had with them. That IS the ultimate goal you are trying to achieve as game developers, right? Maximize the amount of fun that can be had with your product (and thus getting more subscribers leading to a maximizing of profits....).

If you let change go that your player-base is unanimously against, the only result possible is leaving people feel disgruntled toward the product. This is NOT something you want to leave up to "well when it goes live they will see and enjoy it". You have set a precedent for taking feedback from the players and implementing it. To do anything less here will betray those expectations and make things worse than if you never promised to do so in the first place.

This is your game, but OUR experience. Work together with us on this.

Hakaru Ishiwara
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:38:00 - [1137]
 

Dear CCP,

All your clients are asking is for a straight-forward response to their questions on why the dog-leg turn was taken on mothership design so close to the expansion release.

Is there a legal, ethical or human resource-related reason blocking your response? I will take a leap and assume that the answer is yes. Otherwise, /me shakes head.

Also, I am seeing multiple pages disappear from this thread. Really? True, it is your forum and therefore your right to moderate as is desired.

And one of your lead game designers / producers, Noah Ward, has made the time to provide a fair amount of text to mmorpg.com, but is unable to allocate the time to address "the hard core players" (aka, current paying clients and potential viral promoters of CCP products)?

May I suggest a company-wide holiday bonus and gift?

I truly hope that you, as a seemingly forward-looking business entity, can work your way out of this community relationship quagmire.

Sincerely,

One befuddled customer.

Klisejo
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:40:00 - [1138]
 

I was looking forward to Dominion. Now I fear it. What other last minute changes will you make?

EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:42:00 - [1139]
 

You guys seem to be missing a pretty key part of what's going on here: nobody agrees with your decision that the abathur version of motherships was flawed, and you've made no case for why. Without explaining exactly why you started changing them to begin with after they had been perfected (and having that explanation make a great deal of sense), there is going to be no letup no matter how many posts you delete.

Zun Da
Posted - 2009.11.20 20:43:00 - [1140]
 

Originally by: Morphisat
Well we reached 40 now anyway ;)


In your dreams! They are deleting posts faster than you can imagine.

The really sad thing though is that instead of sitting in front of their computers scanning posts frenzily they really should have alarmed some people at CCP who has some responsibility and started talking with them.

I mean, isn't it obvious that something is really WRONG with the whole Dominion expansion and that a large part of the playerbase is really uphappy about that? And that it becomes worse and worse from every blog?

Shouldn't people be really alarmed and discuss and talk and think about it instead of kicking up the watch-dogs to delete all the crap-posts? Yeah yeah I know, forum moderation discussion is not allowed. But think about it!

Try to spend the time thinking about what is WRONG.

Also, why is there only ONE reply in almost 24 hours? It is obvious that there is real concern and worrying, ALL the alliances who are doing capital stuff UNITEDLY say that something is wrong.

Why only one reply? And that reply was pretty incoherent, didn't answer a single question but instead answered some fake-questions which no one even asked or cared about.


Pages: first : previous : ... 34 35 36 37 [38] 39 40 41 42 ... : last (62)

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