open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP Zulupark answers your every question!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : last (16)

Author Topic

Varrakk
Menace ll Society
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:48:00 - [301]
 

Officer Webs.

Why was their ranged almost cut in half?

Lormin Galrak
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:04:00 - [302]
 

Are their any news about your WoD Project?

Cat Molina
Minmatar
Intransigent
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:14:00 - [303]
 

Subject: Requirements for COAD Posting

BACKGROUND: Recent changes lock small corporations from posting in COAD. It cannot be argued that forum was rife with one-man alt corps who spammed incessantly. But rather than actually moderate the forum, and hand out bans as required to regain order, CCP chose to simply eliminate the input of any corporation with a membership under 10 players.

As a one-man corp, I cannot now voice any input on politics in Eve. I am blocked from speaking in COAD, and if I make a politically-themed post in any other forum section, it will be moved to COAD where I cannot reply.



Question #1: As a one-pilot-against-the-world player, where should I post topics concerning politics (assuming I want to be able to respond to them which moving them to COAD would prevent)?

Question #2: Given these changes, do you feel CCP has any concern for smaller game entities (i.e., legitimate one-man corps)? Do those players really matter?

Question #3: Do you, personally, feel the new COAD posting requirements will improve the quality of discussion in that forum?



Bonus Question: What are the odds this post will disappear or be brushed off with a "that's not my area" response? Wink

Lord Migit
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:23:00 - [304]
 

Edited by: Lord Migit on 25/10/2008 17:23:56
is there any way of having some more organisation in the hanger bay, like being able to create folders (named storage bays mite be a more relevent word for in game).

As a mission runner i tend to find i acumulate alot of l00t and although its possible to use containers to devide it up there is no way to do anything to it while its in the container so it makes it inconvieniant.

its just a little thing.

cheers.

zli
Caldari
Com-Star
Mercenaries for Hire
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:27:00 - [305]
 

falcon/rook/ecm drones...

why not just boost eccm instead nerf ships?
the whole ecm thingy needs balancing.

zli

OldWolfe
The Scope
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:41:00 - [306]
 

Can we have customizable dividing compartments to keep Ammo and mods we want to keep separated from loots for all our ships? Will help a lot during mission running or any such so we wont accidentally reprocess our own ammo or mods that we want to keep. Doesn't make sense to dump it all into one storage bay due to the size of the ship's potential m3 storage. In fact, we could split up the m3 into compartments of our choices.

Skogen Gump
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:54:00 - [307]
 

Edited by: Skogen Gump on 25/10/2008 18:07:12
Hi Zulupark, thanks for doing this.

Sorry if this was covered already but I'd like to ask about faction ships.

Recently the navy faction ships have been promoted and boosted, but some collecters like myself would like to use their other ships for more then just station spinning :)

So, will the ships such as the Cruor, Ashimmu, Vigilant, Cynabal etc be looked at with regards to fitting requirements and viability ?

The Ashimmu and Cruor were sadly limited with the Nosferatu changes and now the planned changes to stasis webbers basically mean theres little to no reason to fly one of these beautiful ships when you can fly a recon.

Second question on a similar vein; Are there plans to implement other faction ships, Destroyers or Battle cruisers ?
I'd love to see what Sanshas nation could do in that capacity :)

Edit: removed question about Artys, been covered :)

Instead, I know the UI is being looked at but in the mean time, can we just get a better UI font, or the ability to choose a UI font ? the current one is very hard for some people to read. It's too dense even when its big.

Also, can we get peoples names in chat channels to line up on the left, like in IRC ? it'd be much much much easier to read!

Myra2007
Millstone Industries
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:11:00 - [308]
 

Okay, 2 pretty specific questions:

1. Fendahl once said that the price of the new faction cruisers (the lower tier ones like osprey navy issue and so on) will be tuned down to more reasonable levels in one of the empyrean age point releases. Given that quantum rise is coming soon i'd like to know if this is still on your radar?

2. Fendahl also mentioned that the faction (battle)ships will be revisited along with the navy apoc. The navypoc did indeed get the new apoc bonus but none of the other ships was changed to my knowledge. Does that mean you decided non of the other ships need changing or does it mean you didn't have the time to look into it yet? Can you poke Fendahl on these two?

3. Not a question just saying in 3 years playing this is the single most awesome thing i've seen from you devs (well maybe apart from eve itself). I think you've made a lot of players very happy! <3

Gimpb
The Scope
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:17:00 - [309]
 

Big thanks to Zulupark for doing this!

Question 1:
Unlike missiles, the turret tracking formula allows a favorable tracking situation to compensate for a sig radius disadvantage. This allows spread out larger ships to hit smaller ships fairly well. This results in smaller ships being much less survivable in larger fights than in smaller fights. Is this devaluing of smaller ships in larger fights intentional/considered?

Question 2:
To what extent is the popularity of an item considered in its balancing? For example, you've said you think ECM ships and damper ships are both about right but ECM ships are vastly more popular than damper ships.

Question 3:
Are there any plans to add ships with lower cost and skill requirments that can jumpdrive around?

Question 4:
When facing larger ships, do you think small ships currently have it too easy, too hard, or about right?

Killerhound
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:30:00 - [310]
 

Will there be any changes in future or far future or maybe "soon", to make Triage Modules more usefull in combat like situations?

Waxau
Muppet Ninja's
Ninja Unicorns with Huge Horns
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:34:00 - [311]
 

Black Ops Stats. - Scan res penalty, means they lock as fast as carriers. Intended, considering they're 'hit and run' based? Any plans to change this? Or even Cov Ops Cloak?

Vulture Turret - With the addon to the Moa, Ferox, and Eagle, the Vulture got left out. Now its out of line with its previous 'balanced' form in comparison to the other sniping boats. Any changes coming in for this?




Issaries Valran
Caldari
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:39:00 - [312]
 

Edited by: Issaries Valran on 25/10/2008 18:39:36
Hey there Zulupark I think this is a great idea answering all these questions and all usually I donít bother posting anything (questions, ideas, and thoughts, about things for the developers) on the forums because generally it just feels like a waste of time. Since you never really know if it gets through or is jus dismissed, plus a lot of my questions or ideas and thoughts could be controversial and we know how the eve community, especially the vets hate change or anything that smells like change, unless itís completely new. So I applauded your efforts and do feel a bit sorry for having to type all these answers, especially since they seem to be repeating themselves. Iíll try and not ask the same questions that have already been asked 15 times.

1. So falcons, blasters, Minmatar ship are they going to be rebalÖ Just kidding. Have the development team considered adding upkeep costs, decommissioning/mothballing mechanic to Capital Ships and Super Capital Ships? Something like an upkeep cost similar to how POSís need up keeping or they go offline and canít be used. To help keep their numbers down more so for the Super Capitals Ships than the Capitals ships, and discourage their use among individuals since I think their original implication and intention was for them to be used by Alliances and Corps with the resources and man power to field and utilize them in their role as large scale fleet support/combat ships. Plus an upkeep cost would be a nice ISK and resource sink for Alliances and Corps to help battle inflation.

2. With all the references and questions to Tech 3 and when it is coming out and with your cryptic yet reveling answers to the questions, I think we can all assume that it is coming and more soon than later. So if Tech 3 is implemented will there be more skills implemented with Tech 3 and how would, the implementation of these hypothetical skills affect the disparity of capabilities between Vets and new players, or do you think that there wouldnít be one?

3. With the removal of ghost training (which I agree with seemed kind of silly to be able to get in game benefits without actually being a paying costumer) you have effectively made it harder for people to farm characters. Has the development team thought about adding additional skill training on a single char? Maybe adding an addition line of training. Which in my opinion would have benefits both new players and older players. Allowing older players to train for those Cap ships or those really long skills and still train a shorter skill at the same time. And would decrease one of the pains of being a new player by allowing the simultaneous training of learning skills and game play skills so they can still get a feeling of progressing after starting off without that learning skill problem we all know. There are other reasons I feel it would be a good idea and merits some thought from the developers but would take too much space to spell it out here. Mostly curious if itís something that gets thought about and debated or has been relegated to something that will never happen and might as well forget the idea?

4. Has the development team thought about injecting a bit more vigor and excitement into PvE content missions, exploration, ratting, and other PvE related activates that tends to be ignored over PvP? Maybe taking some clues and incites from other MMOs that do PvE better than Eve does at this time. Revamping the seemingly ignored and forgotten COSMOS system and possible making the PvE content less monotonous and making it feel like you are actually accomplishing something within the Eve Universe and Mythos. Personally I feel that the PvE content in Eve could be used to cure insomnia, has worked for me a few times and I only do it to make ISK so I can go and have actual fun, ea. Pew pew. Which I feel isnít a good thing. Chores in a game kind of beat the purpose of gaming in my opinion.

Issaries Valran
Caldari
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:39:00 - [313]
 

Edited by: Issaries Valran on 25/10/2008 18:40:19
5. Has the development team put any thought of maybe having small pockets of interconnected .5 or higher security status systems in 0.0 as sort of little islands of civilization out in no-manís-land? Perhaps with not so easily camped singular routes leading to 0.0 from these islands. Possibly in the NPC space like Curse, Great Wildlands, or Khanid. Sort of like the pirate factions or Cast off nations have tried to civilize things a bit and promote trade. Or even small Colonels developed and controlled by the bigger empires out deeper in 0.0 for various other reasons. These islands of civilization could be used by the player base for various reasons and since lots of people like to be in high sec for the security and many other reasons might promote people to base themselves out in the deeper reaches of space. Allowing them to have a relatively secure place to run to and still be able to ninja, explore 0.0 or whatever they want to do. Plus might change some of the dynamics of trade and logistic out in 0.0.

6. What are CCPís plans for the future of eve to help keep it relevant in the every growing and heavily saturated MMO market place? Do you see any forcible problems with Eve competing in the market given its age, and with up and coming games like Star Trek online, which appears to be nudging its way into Eveís internet spaceship niche market? Even if its mechanics seem to be vastly different from Eveís. Do these things concern the development team or do you feel immune from such things especially since it appears like Eve has done nothing but grow a larger and large player base?

7. Is the development team happy with the on, off aspect of combat in Eve namely warp disruptors and how they basically are an on and off switch for PvP combat? Making PvP more or less a do or die activity not leaving much of an option for escape with a lot of ships and configurations. Unless you run before getting engaged or are just a really fast ship. Has there ever been discussion or testing of a different system that doesnít necessarily nullify the option of escape?

8. Has the development team thought about making it easier for players, solo or gangs to hunt down their prey after they have jumped out of system and managed to make it to another gate before you? Maybe making it so if you scan a system there is a little warp residue trail that you have a chance of picking up on that will lead you to the gate they jumped through so you can flow them form system to system. Or you could fire a tagging round with a tracer that marks the gate they jump through so you can follow your pray? Of course the tracer or warp residue would have to decay and disappear after a while.

9. When is CCP going to produce a ďPromotionalĒ poster of Eris Discordia? ;P

10. Have you had any of the fermented shark meat, (Hakarl) yet? And if so what is it like and do you like it? What about other Icelandic traditional foods like Rakfisk?

11. Are you tired of answering questions yet?

12. Do you regret agreeing to answer every question we can throw at you?

13. I can I have a job at CCP donít really have any marketable skills other than being incorrigible eccentric and a little off. But I work for food and water and the occasional pat on the head.

14. Do you play World of Warcraft? If so what side Horde or Alliance? By the way playing Wow is evil. :)

Iíll stop now think Iíve asked enough for questions for now Iíll leave my others for the next time.

Uuve Savisaalo
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:46:00 - [314]
 

hello zulupark, it has been quite some time since that fateful day when you were burned in effigy following the supercapitals devblog.

the first thing i'd like to ask you about is your opinion on the present state of the relationship between active and passive tanking, both shield and armour.

you are likely aware of the preference for passive buffer tanking whenever possible, and i'd like to hear some of your opinions on making active tanking a viable option again, which is something i believe to be most effectively done through lowering fitting requirements, cycle times and capacitor usage for armour, as well as lowering natural recharge ability for shield and boosting recharge factor derived from shield fluxes.


MongWen
Xeno Tech Corp
Self Destruct.
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:51:00 - [315]
 

Edited by: MongWen on 25/10/2008 19:04:15
Originally by: Zulupark

Is your question "how do I suicide gank now"? The answer to that would be bring more firepower.


No the question is, are there any plans to fix the war dec mechanics and/or flag mechanics, so that high sec pirates have a way to give risk to high sec, since now its kinda point less to do suicide runs, since the sec standing grind is to slow to be effective againgst anything.
Originally by: Zulupark

Also, I wasn't aware we were boosting isk farmers.


Then you should look at high sec ice belts (bring a stop watch), and high sec mission systems like aramachi, motsu, isenairos and saila (and more) stats (like local count, active missions and so on), and compare it to the pre concord changes...


Edit:
I might want to get you a beer at fanfest for doing this ;)

Finnroth
The Guardian Agency
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:57:00 - [316]
 

Here i go:

- Do you have any plans to support the G15 Display for EVE?

- you said there're currently no plans for further ships for the smaller factions, why? Do you lack roles for them, is there too much work involved, or are your development slots just full for now?

- I gather form your answeres, Tech3 will be something about the old races - will we see more fiction about them?

- At some point you mentioned your intention to maybe remove mission loot and let the rats drop stuff for meta-item construction. There were also plans to make Tech1 manufacturing more challenging - this one you already answered i believe.
So basically, do you have any plans to expand on the Tech1 manufacturing process in any way?

- Boosters are pretty weird at the moment, they have....veeeery strange descriptions (no sense at all) and are imo badly balanced. You mentioned something of an overhaul and hangover effects - any ETA? Also, do you consider to overhaul the manufacturing process an maybe even giving more possibilitys to get the raw materials?

- Fuel Rods/Bricks/Pellets? Yes/No? :D

- Will you consider giving possiblitys to regain standing with factions?

- COSMOS, what is your opinion on that?

- COSMOS, any plans to expand on the COSMOS items and give them more meaning by giving more options to get them? Also, any plans to make the existing COSMOS content less static and more dynamic?

- Are there plans to introduce some more skillsets? I have no real idea where and how, but quite a bunch of players are reaching a maximum in there chosen path(s). There still is some buffer to play with, but i guess some players will run out of meaning full skills to skill somewhere around the first half next year.

- There was word of capital rebalancing for the next expansion, is this still on your list, or will you do that at a later time?

Thats it for now, thanks in advance.

Zhang Ramses
Chaos From Order
Manifest Destiny.
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:59:00 - [317]
 


Are there any plans to increase the functionality of locator agents? Specifically, could we pay a (much higher) fee to get running intel on the target if they change systems? The duration of tracking or the number of system changes could be kept low to prevent abuse. It's just frustrating to use a locator, find the person is 15-20 jumps away, go over to where she was, and have to rely on another character to run the locator again.

Are there any plans to introduce an astrometric bonus'd cruiser size ship? Exploration content almost requires one ship to probe it out, and another ship to complete the content. A ship with moderate combat capabilities and a bonus to scan probe duration would really help bring exploration to the middle of the bell curve.

Are there any plans to increase the randomization of the 0.0 COSMOS exploration sites that are farmed 23/7? Or, even better, removing them altogether? Surely, CCP didn't intend for such an ISK faucet to be easily controlled by a single player running 5-6 exploration alts?

Thanks!

Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:02:00 - [318]
 

I just want to say that I think this thread is without a doubt the best iniative the Devs have taken in months. Thank you for that. :)

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:04:00 - [319]
 

How often is Features and Ideas polled for...well, new features and ideas?

Is there anything in general we can do (apart from being clear and coherent) when posting ideas to perhaps help out?

Ampoliros
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:11:00 - [320]
 

Reposted for Tarminic:

Zulupark, how do you feel about altering small gang objectives (a.k.a. station services, POS modules outside the forcefield) to use FW-style mechanics, where completion time remains approximately the same regardless of how many ships are in the gang? My personal belief is that objectives whose completion time decreases linearly with the amount of DPS brought to bear on them are a huge factor in encouraging blobs.

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
DarkSide.
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:14:00 - [321]
 

Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 26/10/2008 22:02:26


- Is something planned to be done to improve the attractiveness (cost effectivity - whatever) of Field Command Ships?

Some thoughts on this here: http://myeve.eve-online.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=883374)
In brief - CS don't provide enough tank/firepower boost over anything smaller while they're as clumsy as Battleships and considerably more expensive. Fitting GAMs is too tight and renders your setup gimped on any ship one way or another.



- Any plans to balance out tier1/tier2 battlecruisers?
(will indirectly require to boost CS, too)

As it stands, there's no point in using Prophecy, Cyclon, Ferox for other than just hulls in tech 2 variants production purposes. Don't you think extra dronebay size, extra hi- and extra med-slots come with no drawbacks? You can't say Domi is worse than Hype or Scorp is subpair to Raven or Rokh - well, they're just different! While all BC are more or less the same with the exception that tier 2 ones are just all-round better.


- Are useless weapons (like Quad Light Beam lasers) gonna ever get fixed/removed/replaced with something cool or at least usefull?

Posted a topic on it long time ago, seems it just got ignored. Well, in brief - Focused Medium Pulse II outperforms Quad Light Beam II in every single way and at any distance - how's it balanced?


- Why cap use on beams is that high?

Beams consume 62.5% more cap to deal the same damage pulses do. While rails consume just about 47% more than blasters (still per damage unit, not per second). Seems unfair to me - if anything, the difference in cap use of beams/pulses is to be closer than of rails/blasters since two laser weapon systems are a lot closer to each other in terms of DPS, range, tracking etc, too!


- Tachyons are awesome. Any hope for us to see them in smaller size, too?


- When will COSMOS mods get rebalanced? Is anyone within CCP actually aware those were designed an age ago and now this kind of stuff is greatly outdated? :)

Jordan Musgrat
Convergent
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:25:00 - [322]
 

Edited by: Jordan Musgrat on 25/10/2008 19:26:31
Few questions based off your feedback, it's much appreciated. Even if you're wrong, you're sharing information, which is something we haven't had in a long time.

#1 MWD speeds- Can you take another look at this? I think that if you end up going through with the velocity/agility/mass/overdrive/claymore/snake/implants nerf (take a step back, do you see how much you're really changing, all in the name of "nano nerf"), then you can leave all MWDs as they are. With current Sisi numbers, it will not be possible to go 50k with a 5bn Crusader. A 150m mwd should still give more speed increase than a T1, period. Please just leave mwds alone, they're going to be underpowered enough as it is, speed tanking will be hard enough.

#2 Active tank vs resistance bonuses- There are many numbers and graphs to show that resistance bonuses give a much better tank in all situations, at least on armor. Comparing similarly rigged/fitted armor BS, the resistance based BS will be better every time. It's not only more efficient repping, it's less cap usage. Could you maybe edit this bonus to also apply to remote armor repairers? You stated that the bonus fills a niche. Well as a matter of fact, it does not, but if the bonus to armor reps also applied to remotes, then we would see a whole new level of use of the tier 3 BS.

#3 Artillery- Arty were balanced before the HP increase, no? They were effectively nerfed with the HP buff, so their only saving grace, the alpha, should have been proportionally increased. I don't mean their dps, just their alpha strike.

#4 Tempest- You can do certain things ok with the Tempest, but it has no real forte, no area where it excels. You might be happy with a ship that's mediocre in most areas, but people want specialized ships that do well in certain situations. You'll have to decide if you want to do that or not. Currently, there's not much reason to fly the Tempest, as Phoon/Maelstrom do the Tempest's jobs much better.

#5 BS speed reduction- Thanks for the agility. Even if you want to competely nerf the hell out of speed, keep agility comparable to current TQ. Also, max 8km/second? So investing 10bn in implants/modules will allow an interceptor to go 8km/second, which cannot entirely speed tank almost anything. Part of the problem is claymores still give the same bonuses to Rapiers/Arazus. Don't you see, you've nerfed speed ships, but kept speed killers almost the same. Please take another look at this. Even 15km/second does not break or strain your physics engine, I have a lot of experience, much more than you, looking at your favorite ships. It was just the claymore boosted 60k crusaders that you needed to nerf, not your 10k crow. 10k crows spend most of their time dying or running away, there's nothing overpowered about that. Maybe 8k maximum hac/recon speed? Interceptors might as well be taken out of the game if a T2 fitted crow only does 5km/second. Again, read the forums, everyone would agree with me.

#6 Speed tanking- You said you are deferring this topic to balancing, but it is essential that we know soon. Do the balancers think that no ship should be able to speed tank? In the past, devs stated that it was a viable tactic, but with current Sisi, it is impossible to reliably speed tank almost anything. This means instead of nerfing nanos, you are taking the class of nano warfare out of the game. Oh and this is not a question, you are doing this beyond any doubt. The question is, what made you change from "we need to nerf nanos" to "speed tanking should not be a viable tactic?" We need someone to answer this before the changes go live please.

Mioelnir
Minmatar
Cataclysm Enterprises
Ev0ke
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:27:00 - [323]
 

Oh, and one thing I forgot. I do understand that Pirate factions probably do not have the ressources to pull off multiple own station types, but do you also find it immersion breaking to dock at an Archangels station just to have Amarrian banners waving in your head and hear ruthless pirates singing religious chorals into the void?

Mephie
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:27:00 - [324]
 

Originally by: CCP Zulupark
Carebear UI/scanners:
We're looking into pretty significant changes to mining mechanics and UI. We'll disclose more info about that at Fanfest.


Since you've got guys in that section of code already, mind adding the "Tag" column to the Survey scanner UI?
Twisted Evil

--Meph

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:37:00 - [325]
 

Edited by: Misanth on 25/10/2008 19:38:12
First off; great initiative, took me half evening to read through all questions, well worth it. Nice to see the EVE community this constructive as well. Also, this Q&A redeemed the poor PR with the ghosttraining. Respect.

* Were you ever considering, and perhaps, are you still considering to put a mobile jumpdrive on ships, a'la Black Ops but for regular ships?

I'll elaborate so it doesn't sound complete off-limits; obviously this would be very powerful if non-titans were allowed to throw ships around left and right. However, and here's the key; quite long before the Black Ops were released we had some information of a new "t2 Battleship" that would have a "mobile jumpdrive" and it would be able to open portals for frig- and cruiser sized ships.

That idea still seems perfectly viable to me, and a way to counter both blobbage, but also to provide tactics to assault hostile space, something both players and devs seems to want to boost a bit. What makes it different from Black Ops? Recons can't tank, thus it'd be really easy for a/few supercap/caps to defend. With some HIC's, HAC's, interceptor/dictor etc it'd be a totally different situation. Jumpbridges and Stations would be hot spots.

And a followup question on that;

While low sec pipes makes sense, limiting entry points in 0.0 promote blobbing and is less logical. Mobile jumpdrives is one way to counter this (hence my liking for that option). Another thought could be to simply link more systems in 0.0 to give more viable travel- and entry-routes.
* That's something you guys considered?

Broska
D00M.
Triumvirate.
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:39:00 - [326]
 

How many Subs are you prepared to loose from the over the top nano nerf?

Zothike
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:40:00 - [327]
 

-Would be cool for stuff management and for server load in general to be able to remotly stack stuff as it's possible to repackage stuff
I have stations where i can't dock (hostiles) where i have more than 1600 items which would go easily at 700-1000 if i could stack them

-old Drugs (like frentix, tooth sayer or such) that we used to get as loot from some missions
I have plenty of them in several stations since years, they will have (have ?) a purpose one day or i can trash them ?

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:53:00 - [328]
 

Edited by: Terianna Eri on 25/10/2008 22:50:29
:D thanks for the answers zulu, this is really great stuff.
I guess I'll have to see whether ABing HACs will be pwnmobiles or pwnedmobiles after the patch ;)

Easy question this time:

will you please, please fix the turret placement on the harbinger?
To clarify: Apparently the ship was originally going to have 8 turrets (hey can you do that for me too plz), but it was released with 7. Turrets 7 and 8 are placed on the underside of the hull near the front, but with only 7 turrets there's just a single turret there on the starboard side, and it looks dumb Evil or Very Mad

(also can we make the engine trails of the abaddon properly symmetrical and fix the glass panel on the front of the curse/arbitrator/pilgrim please; bug reports have been submitted)

EDIT: Just took a closer look at your second set of answers to me, and the last thing you said got cut off by the post limit. I'm not going to be saying any more about the topic (I'm very grateful that you took that much time to reply to me in the first place) but if you could finish the thought you had there, it'd be great Very Happy

For reference,
Originally by: CCP Zulupark
I briefly read your thread (don't have a lot of time to go into details :)) and I understand where you're going with this I think, basically AB would replace

Shaar Cobalt
Minmatar
Posted - 2008.10.25 20:07:00 - [329]
 

Q: Are the numerous stargates in the eve universe to be changed in the near future, in regard to how these stargates work/function and how the pilots interact with them?

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2008.10.25 20:13:00 - [330]
 

Edited by: Kerfira on 26/10/2008 10:47:16
Thank you VERY much for doing this! It's exactly the kind of dev-player interfacing we've been missing :-)

Alliance tournament:
Are there going to be more of them or not?
I'm not refering to the fanfest one for the rich kids (rich enough to travel to Iceland).

Standings recovery:
Are there changes planned to standings so you can recover from very bad standings? I know the theory is that you don't get something for nothing (derived negative standings), and that killing someones ships means they don't like you, but in effect what happens is that you put major parts of game content off-limits to players with no possibility of ever getting to use that content (i'm thinking mostly of pirate factions for most empire dwellers, but also cosmos for other races than your chosen one)...
It would not have to be easy to recover standings, but it should be possible....

Warp speed of interceptors:
Currently, warping consists of warp accelleration, warp flight and warp decelleration. Warp flight is adjusted by a ships max warp speed, but the two others are afaik the same for all ships. This means that even supposedly 'fast warp' ships like interceptors really aren't unless we're talking 40+ AU warps. Are the any chances this will be changed?

EVE 'size':
My personal opinion is that EVE has gotten too 'small'. It isn't really a big deal anymore to move a fleet halfway across the galaxy. It could potentially be useful to decrease warp speed for large ships, and maybe reduce jump range for capitals. Any considerations on the 'size' of the EVE universe.

Jump clones:
Any you considering changes to jump clones? Personally I would find it logical that using jump clones had a (relatively high) cost that was proportional to the range you're jumping.

Too much money in the game:
What is your opinion on this? It seems to me that ISK is not a problem to anyone except the newest players. It should be! A battleships should be a big investment, capitals even more so. That large ships are so 'cheap' means that the smaller ship classes go unused....

EVE a dark and gloomy universe:
No it isn't! It's bright and multicolored! This does not only conflict with the 'feel' EVE (imho) should have, but also on many occations make it difficult to see whether your modules are on or off.... Could it perhaps be an idea to get a 'gamma' adjuster for the space background?

Pin the 'pinned' windows:
Please make windows that users 'pin' actually BE pinned!

Sovereignty warfare:
Shooting inanimate objects like POS and station services are the most boring parts of EVE, but the suggested 'capture the gates' solution (by Nozh) is even worse!
Wouldn't it be better to determined sovereignty from what people DID in an area?
I'm thinking ratting/fighting/mining here, anything where your enemies can interrupt you. Basically, if you move into an enemy area and start activities there, your enemy HAVE to start confronting you or gradually lose sov. This would also remove the 'timed-to-the-second' POS warfare that encourages blobbing and spread the activities over a larger timespan.

Continues....


Pages: first : previous : ... 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 ... : last (16)

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