open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Enough is Enough
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.21 04:46:00 - [1]
 

I have read that Tech 2 BP/BPC's will be deistribued via agent missions (probably level 4 or 5 agents), and that these missions will require corporations to complete. Again CCP only thinks about the warrior oriented players and forgets about the backbone of the economy. Tech 2 BP's should only come from research!!!

I guess I should just start over because my character is totally useless in the present EVE environment. The only way to get ahead in this game now is to follow a combat path. If you want to be a researcher/scientist you are SOL, CCP get your head out of your rear. Who do you think makes the weapons, equipment, and fighting vehicles in the real world? It is surely not the soldier.
Before any of you start bashing me, take this into consideration. While you were working on gunnery skills and such I have been working of Industy skill and science skills. While your skill path has continually been rewarded by CCP those of use who chose the other path have been neglected.
The Eve economy sucks, there is no way for a non-combat oriented player to get ahead other than to sc**** along by mining Scorite. And continually we see the large mega corporations get richer, by focusing on combat. I personnaly will stick it out through one more major patch and if CCP has not put forth a conserted effort to balance this game I will be calling it quits.
Thank you CCP for a totally unrealistic look at the future. If any CCP representitive would like to comment on my accusations please feel free to either email me or post here.

One disgruntled "Carebear"
Supplier of over 2million units of Hybrid Charges

Flaloch
Doomheim
Posted - 2003.10.21 05:52:00 - [2]
 

Although, when reverse engineering gets implemented, it will be ironic to see the people who have done alot of missions complaining about the exact opposite !

It's just a shame that an online game is never done, nor will it be ... ever.


Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.21 06:05:00 - [3]
 

I'm afraid that when (or if at this rate) reverse engineering does come out too many of us who have choosen to follow the non-combat path will be either gone or so far behind the power curve that we will not be able to catch up with the combat oriented folks.

It will be like putting a badaid on a severed leg.Sad

Discorporation
Amarr
Evolution
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2003.10.21 07:57:00 - [4]
 

Why do people always think that something that happens to get mentioned will be the -only- way something will happen?


Astaroth
The Scope
Posted - 2003.10.21 12:21:00 - [5]
 

Still i must admit its about time reverse engineering was implemented in some way, it can be limited in many ways if ppl are afraid it would unbalance stuff...

Such as making reverse engineering an item result in a limited run bp with runs dependent on production time of the item and the skill of the researcher. And with the process takin a good time.

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.21 13:21:00 - [6]
 

Quote:
I have read that Tech 2 BP/BPC's will be deistribued via agent missions (probably level 4 or 5 agents), and that these missions will require corporations to complete. Again CCP only thinks about the warrior oriented players and forgets about the backbone of the economy. Tech 2 BP's should only come from research!!!


Trusting rumours is bad. The thread where people thought that unlimited blueprints would be capped by the patch, at the time, reached no less than 4 pages of posts about how it was bad and how people would quit, despite the fact that on the test server, no such thing was actually happening.

My suggestion: get someone to ask about the planned blueprint distribution methods at the next CSM meeting.

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.21 19:14:00 - [7]
 

Quote:

My suggestion: get someone to ask about the planned blueprint distribution methods at the next CSM meeting.


Thanks Redundancy for setting the record straight on this. When and where is the next CSM meeting? Confused

Boneca
Imperial Shipment
Posted - 2003.10.21 22:26:00 - [8]
 

Quote:
Quote:

My suggestion: get someone to ask about the planned blueprint distribution methods at the next CSM meeting.


Why does this have to be asked at a CSM meeting, can't we just be toldRolling Eyes

Nafres Maelstrom
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2003.10.22 00:24:00 - [9]
 

lol red

csm like thats a realistic timeframe for any feature delivery.

so far there trackrecord with deployment is abysmal.


Qandor
Posted - 2003.10.22 01:56:00 - [10]
 

Quote:
My suggestion: get someone to ask about the planned blueprint distribution methods at the next CSM meeting



CSM Rep: So TomB, what about the the planned blueprint distibution for Tech level 2?

TomB: tech 2, when? = ?
TomB: isn't tech 2 out there?

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.22 04:49:00 - [11]
 

What I still find confusing is that what I am most ****ed about is not just the rumor about tech 2 bp being delivered via missions. But the fact that nothing has been done to make Scientist/Researcher/Manufacturer careers a viable path.
Istead these threads boil down to "the 'Carebears' are whining again" when in fact the 'Carebears' are just as much a part of this game as the soldiers. It's time that CCP remember that.

CCP - When you set up this game you gave us the option to choose a carrer path. Its time for you to live up to those options. Some of us purchased this game not because we are only interested in the combat portion but also the concept of carrer progression. With the way this game is set up there is a myriad of ways the character can be unique but only one way they can progress.. Combat. I have been playing this game since prior to the one and only rollback we have had. I have concentrated my training on Mining and research instead of skills that would make me a better warrior. In todays Eve environment my character is no better than the newbie that just starts out, with the exception I have a much more expensive ship. The newbie has an advantage over me as he can delete his character and start over with a combat oriented character with little wasted time. I on the other hand would lose months of training time.
I really like this game but would like it to be fixed. Please CCP look at the other aspects of this game other than just the combat oriented players.

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.22 12:57:00 - [12]
 

Some tech level 2 stuff is out there, but the question you need answered is specifically how the blueprints for tech 2 will be distributed, which as far as I know, has never been asked / addressed in a CSM.

I very much doubt that CCP will use a single method of distibution, so saying, for example, that using agent missions is bad because no producer / researcher can get them that may well be ignoring other possible methods of distribution that may be more suited to those proffesions.

As to why they can't reply to it here - this is the wrong forum for this thread anyway. I'm being lenient in enforcing the rules on that because I think it important to make sure you understand the best way to get an answer. The CSM is the official and best way to grab a developer and ask them something like this.

Starting a forum thread in the wrong forum where you first make an assumption and then become somewhat abusive to CCP about it and threatening to quit is not.

Make a real effort to find out what CCP are planning, then judge and provide *constructive* criticism about it in an effort to make sure they get it right for everyone.

Saint Viper
Minmatar
UK Corp
FATAL Alliance
Posted - 2003.10.22 13:54:00 - [13]
 

No offence but, we should not have to go begging to ccp.

CCP should be keeping all players informed of what is happening and what is planned, you have to rememeber that it is US the players keeping this game going, and as such should be treated with a bit of respect.

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.22 14:23:00 - [14]
 

I'm afraid I don't see how asking about something like this through an official feedback and information chat can be related to the implied loss of face and degradation associated with begging.

I also don't see how a weekly chat held between developers and a small number of representatives of players with the logs publically available implies a lack of respect.

There isn't any slighting going on here - it is simply true that the only way to properly criticise or discuss plans is when you know what the plan is, and that the CSMs provide the best opertunity to find it out.

Cptn Stardust
Posted - 2003.10.22 15:56:00 - [15]
 

no offense intended, i don't really agree.

The posts have been made on the General Forum in recent weeks regarding the CSM chats.

People won't go and read the CSM logs. why? because they are too full of 'noise' and people talking over each other's conversations.

Meanwhile, the announcement forum right here on the boards, hasn't had a new post in over a month now

There needs to be more communication between the staff and the customers

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.22 16:57:00 - [16]
 

If you feel that the CSMs aren't receiving enough exposure, nor are presented in an orderly enough fashion, you should email Pann.

I don't think that presentational issues change it from being a reasonable effort to provide communication. I certainly don't think it should be discounted as a method of communication because representatives sometimes talk over each other.

You could also petition one of the news sites to provide a CSM Q&A formatting, with keyword searching or something.

McWatt
Caldari
Posted - 2003.10.22 17:43:00 - [17]
 

seek information --> go csm log.

lol.


btw, this question has been asked and i remember auctions being mentioned as prefered method of distribution.lol again.

Lucas De'Thal
Posted - 2003.10.22 19:41:00 - [18]
 

Redundancy, go to the CSM chat? i'm sorry that's a joke.

read my sig. that's how good the csm chats do.

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.22 20:52:00 - [19]
 

I'm not in the least surpised. TomB is a game designer, not a full time member of CCP's QA department. Your expectations are based on, and dissapointed by, a misunderstanding of how things work, and because of that you would claim that asking a question like that in a CSM is a fruitless exercise. Pointing TomB's attention to problems however, is not fruitless, as I know he follows up the problems brought to his attention and tries to make sure they are fixed as soon as possible.

I would humbly suggest that if you miss the point of CSMs because of that, and don't try and get the questions that you see as important asked in them, you'll be both kicking a gift horse in the mouth and cutting off your nose to spite your face at the same time.

I cannot sympathise with any claims that you don't get enough information if you throw away the opertunities that are given you out of pique.

Qandor
Posted - 2003.10.22 22:50:00 - [20]
 

Redundancy, since you seem to be emphasizing the value of the CSM chats, let me provide three examples from previous CSM chats.

This first one from THREE months ago.

From CSM of 2003-07-31

TomB > 5 new frigates are also story related, and with balancing we will be introducing new stuff to do most balancing for us, but we will keep on balancing the current ships but not as high priority as getting new ships to take over :)

TomB > you can expect the new frigates in 2-3 weeks to enter the game

TomB > 5. is Q number 5, not 5 new frigates :)


And another from two and a half months ago.

From CSM of 2003-08-07

TomB > tech level II for example will be introduced very shortly

TomB > new ships as well



And finally from two months ago.

From CSM of 2003-08-27

Momm > tech 2, when?

Gurenus > I have some isues to adress to TomB, but I'll better do it after chat

TomB > tech 2, when? = ?

TomB > isn't tech 2 out there?

Momm > when will it become reasily available to all

Momm > readily*

TomB > i think that all tech 2 owners are just keeping their mouths shut and keeping tham away from other players

Momm > sigh, many small corps cant even imagine tech 2

TomB > :)

Momm > seems like all is being catered to the mega corps

Ralek > I'm a freelancer and I have access to tech 2

Pann > How would they have gotten them, Tom?

TomB > the only item so far was the miner ii, others will now start falling in

Momm > theres no way for small corps to get their hands on them unless they purchase from mega corps or become 'lucky'

TomB > next week, hopefully this weekend?


So now explain the value of the CSM's please, if we can get answers like these.

Nafres Maelstrom
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2003.10.22 23:06:00 - [21]
 

red i think what the poster was alluding to is that research and manufacture get backburnered quite a bit,as did agents till recvently.

as a researcher char,there is nothing to do in eve...nothing.

as a manufacturer, they flooded the market with bps to quickstart,that was shortsighted to the development of manufacturing chars,although it did get the game up fast.

thing is there is no real player economy except on unique items,which ccp has blundered through the delivery process severals times.i personally like that agnets can deliver bps,and that after patch itll be randomized.but it should also be quantified,as in there should be a limited number of bps of each type available to be gleaned from agents.

that way market for these items is gaurenteed,as theres not an unlimited flow,and so comsumption,supply/demand forces can come into play.

i think generally what folks want is some depth to the market/research/manufacture content.

thats the best to the piont critique i can muster atm

Luna Black
Posted - 2003.10.22 23:11:00 - [22]
 

I very much agree, the point made here mirrors my own. Once again CCP caters to the mega corps and the war orientated. they do promise other career paths but when played you find them barren. While the the changes seem to further unballance the game. CCP can make any game they wish, but i bet there are not enough mega corp and pirate players to pay for eve and that 50% plus income is from the players of the 'other game Eve'. All of whom are disatisfied and frustrated, and not to put it to mildly insulted by the constant rudness of 'carebears' and other such comments mostly inplying weakness and stupidity for not playing the game the way the more combat and agressive types wish. when will trade , negotiation, connections ,revers eng , biology and the miriad of other skills be implimented oh not before we have a new bigger ship 'titan' for the mega's to play with.

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.23 06:47:00 - [23]
 

Quote:
red i think what the poster was alluding to is that research and manufacture get backburnered quite a bit,as did agents till recvently.

as a researcher char,there is nothing to do in eve...nothing.



This is my point exactly!

Red, I am not trying to bash CCP. But would like some attention paid to the rest of the game as well. You mentioned that this is not the right place to post this type of responce. But I say, yes it is. This is the Patch review forum, correct? My point here is to address a lack of "Patches" that fix the problems with the non-combat portion of the game. You mentioned using CSM as the proper way to communicate with CCP. To this I ask why? Is this not CCP'd own website? Why offer a forum if you do not intend to use it to gather information from the players who play the game? There are some people who play the game that do not visit other sites and rely on this forum to find out information on the game. Having read some of the post made in the various forums here I have been amazed at some of the creative solutions to some of the problems with Eve. These forums represent the people of Eve, CCP has created the world but we live in it. I know not everything that we think of can be implemented but some of our ideas do not sound like they would be hard.
An example of this would be to make production of items need a specific skill, i.e. to produce ammunition you would need a skill in ammunition construction. This would keep most soldiers from constructing there own ammo and return the market back to the manufaturer.

The fact that you have read my post and continue to monitor this thread is absolutly wonderful. It is my deapest dream that something that may get typed here will get passed on to those who do make the decisions higher up.

Qual
Gallente
Cornexant Research
Posted - 2003.10.23 07:43:00 - [24]
 

Well, to defend CCP: There is no reason to tell you how to get this stuff before its out there. Part of the fun will be to figure out hwat the paths are to get Tech II stuff. And I guess they will be manyfold.

As for teh higher stuff beeing geared towards corps. Well sure. Of course it is. If it were not life would be WAY to easy for the corps and the loners would still be left behind.

Face it. Working alone is a no win situation. (And should be, unless you are prepared to live with the fact that you cant compete with corps as a loner.)Give in and find a corp...

Dorothy Wayneright
Posted - 2003.10.23 09:40:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Dorothy Wayneright on 23/10/2003 09:48:56
Actually here is a thread where a DEV says that Tech 2 will be implimented through agents. Saying that there is no mention of it one way or another is erroneous.

Now it may be that it can be introduced in other ways as well but I think the point is that no-one has said anything about any other way. For now the only sign that it will be an option is the little 'Reverse Engineer' option in our Research Facility slots when we install a new BP. Where as it has already been mentioned how missions/combat oriented players will get access to it.

As far as CSM. Mysticaa is right, players shouldn't have to go to one specific place to get feedback and information. Why? cause we pay CCP, not the otherway around. We are the consumer and they should make it available to us. Not we make it available to ourselves.

I understand that CCP isn't out to make everyone happy but at least do what you say you are going to do. Most would think that is not to much to ask.

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.23 13:22:00 - [26]
 

I'm aware that agents have indeed been mentioned as one of the methods for introducing tech 2 blueprints. As the original poster makes completely clear in the first paragraph though, they see this as the only method of introduction and also thinks that...

Quote:
Again CCP only thinks about the warrior oriented players and forgets about the backbone of the economy. Tech 2 BP's should only come from research!!!


Now, my experience of Agent missions would lead me to believe that far from being combat only, they're far more tailored to people who want to haul stuff about, especially on those fun long 32 jump trips with absolutely no combat involved.

Further, I'm utterly worried about the concept that CCP should use only research as a method of introduction because it limits the whole thing, and a huge amount of power, to a small group of people and based off a system that currently *only* works for people who own original blueprints from tech 1. You couldn't get much more exclusive than that.

I'm all for good suggestions of changes to the research system, but utterly against making it so exclusive, or almost inevitably tying it to those who already probably used a large corp to get hold of an original in the first tech level.

I suppose that deals with the subject at hand.

Why am I still sitting here advocating the use of the CSMs to get information you think is important, and getting across information you think is important?

For one, if you title your thread "enough is enough" [especially in the wrong forum *grumble*] the devs that read patch review are unlikely to read it, because the programmers tend to read the threads which, through the title, appear to relate to their areas of responsiblity. This is due to the practical limit of time that they have.

Secondly, a complete explanation of the introduction methods that will be used for tech 2 should not be part of a thread that will dissapear in a few days, it needs to be part of something that is regularly saved and searchable by people who were not there at the time, and CSMs / dev blogs etc are the best things for this, and you can't really request a dev blog.

Lastly, I suggest CSMs because they are an official, face to face discussion, where if the question is asked, it will almost undoubtably be answered at least partially, giving you a certainty of something that you can then sit down and discuss. Threads on the forum can and will sink beneath the waves, including on these questions, as has happened before.

I think the CSM from last night shows what you can manage when you have a captive audience of devs, and I think that most people have missed that point up till now.

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.23 18:35:00 - [27]
 

Quote:

Further, I'm utterly worried about the concept that CCP should use only research as a method of introduction because it limits the whole thing, and a huge amount of power, to a small group of people and based off a system that currently *only* works for people who own original blueprints from tech 1. You couldn't get much more exclusive than that.



All I am suggesting is that the inital introduction of a tech advance should be player researched. Once a new technology is "found" then agents would have access to them and could then give BPC of that tech out as rewards.

*example*
M0O's scientist discover the tech 2 ability to increase the damage output of Antimatter S Charges. (Don't know if M0O has any scientist on staff but its just an example) Shortly there after Agents would get blue print copies (usually through naferious means).

This approach would fulfill three things.
1. It would give the Coporation or Scientist the presige of finding the new technology.

2. They would initally have an advantage because they would be the only one with the technology.

3. Provide a realistic deployment of the Technology.

News headlines could read
Quote:
M0O Scientist discover the Ultra Antimatter S charge - When did M0O hire scientist

Redundancy

Posted - 2003.10.23 18:41:00 - [28]
 

You say the initial advance, but previously you said:

Quote:
Tech 2 BP's should only come from research!!!


If you do that for all the tech 2 blueprints, you limit them in the way that I've described, and provide one of the single most valuable items in eve - original blueprints of a new tech level, to a small group of people who are researchers and have a (researchable) tech level 1 original blueprint.

It would be nice to both get the first parts of new technology through research, and announce them on the website with some prestige (assuming the people involved allow it), but in my eyes, it can't be done without suggesting some big changes to the way that research works.

Mysticaa
Gallente
Fringe Roamers of Goa
Posted - 2003.10.23 19:18:00 - [29]
 

Quote:

If you do that for all the tech 2 blueprints, you limit them in the way that I've described, and provide one of the single most valuable items in eve - original blueprints of a new tech level, to a small group of people who are researchers and have a (researchable) tech level 1 original blueprint.



No offense but how is this different than the way Miner 2's were introduced? Yes it will initally limit who has researchable BP's but it will also force corporations to hire researchers if they want those BP's. As for original tech 1 blueprints, they are presently unlimited in supply so if a corporation wants the new technology they would have to buy a tech 1 blueprint and research it, or wait for a researcher to offer it on the market, or hope to get lucky and get a blueprint copy from an agent (and maybe a rare chance of getting an original), but that technology would not be available until someone researched it.

I realize that my suggestion would require alot of work and reprogramming but it just a suggestion Very Happy

Dorothy Wayneright
Posted - 2003.10.25 22:32:00 - [30]
 

Edited by: Dorothy Wayneright on 25/10/2003 22:38:33
It would seem that the universe is full of irony. Here is a link to a copy of a chat with TomB. While I have heard many question his knowledge on the timescale for implimentation of new facets in the game; I haven't heard anyone question his general knowledge on 'what is' planned in general.

From what he said it would seem that Reverse Engineering was never intended to introduce new technologies persay as modify the existing ones. Which in the end could be the same thing. All that is known is he said that it would be something special.

in CCPs defense though I choose to repeat a line from the movie Ghost in the Shell;
Quote:
over specialize and you breed in weakness. It's a slow death.
If you build your character just as a researcher then perhaps you should look at it as that you yourself choose to limit your character to that one facet of the game. I myself created my primary as a researcher as well but I have also had designs on making her a fighter despite her high intelligence and memory. To me it was a way of making a balanced character. :: shrugs:: but to each their own enjoyment of the game.


Pages: [1] 2

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