hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 148

Thread: Jump Fatigue Round Table with CCP Larrikin

  1. #101
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    16,604
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    CCP seems to view moving and power projection as one in the same.
    Because it is.
    Well I guess this answers the question "What would it take for Marlona Sky to start posting again".

  2. #102
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    CCP seems to view moving and power projection as one in the same.
    Because it is.
    Well I guess this answers the question "What would it take for Marlona Sky to start posting again".
    Well, someone directed me at this topic yesterday while I was chatting with them. I doubt I'll start posting again at some normal rate, if at all. I was just shaking my head that some people still don't understand that at its core; moving is power projection. Trying to ask CCP to come up with a mechanical change that can tell the difference between players intentions when moving assets around and trying to predict how long they plan to stay there is asinine. Eve is a complex game and has a lot of layers to it and if you peal back enough layers on an issue you will find many things are closely tied together.

    But, those who rely on 'super short term moves that happen to land on the same grid as some guys I don't like and I'm forced to defend myself with my conveniently combat fit moving truck' tend to do a lot of emotionally charged posting.

    And town hall meeting questions from what I hear.

    Also, miss you guys. <3

  3. #103
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,420
    "FHC Member has exceeded their stored private messages quota and cannot accept further messages until they clear some space."

  4. #104
    Fara's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Lochiel View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Batolemaeus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fara View Post
    IDK why local production is so important in the first place, other than it would be nice extra feature for paperpushers to play with. It'll just make attacking more tedious and defending more comfortable in a serious conflict and Im not sure in a environment where everybody lacks motivation to attack we need this.

    Tho maybe im wrong?

    It's important if you want to gut importing, which is what every JF nerf amounts to. You can't punish logistics without offering an alternative. Because if you do, you devalue even more of nullsec by making it such a tedious mess to move shit there that the only things in that space are bots and farmers. See drone regions, far south and east of the map.
    To expand upon this; currently in order to live in NullSec you need to have a few highly dedicated and motivated people who do nothing but play space trucker. If those players burn out, or you don't treat them well enough, you're fucked. Any m3 you can source locally reduces the pressure on the logistical pipeline, and thus reduces the necessity for hardcore space truckers. Local production is a way of spreading out the workload without additional JF's and cyno alts.
    Well some people seem to like being hardcore space truckers (also since they generally do loads of moneys), it has never been a problem in any alliance I've been also no alliance has ever run out of useful logistic dudes so v0v

    Im sure it would be great if it was super cool to push buttons and produce and feel like industrials are really important, but then this shouldn't happen at the cost of increasing the barrier of entrance or just plain ease imho. Especially not right now.

  5. #105
    Bocephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 26, 2013
    Location
    [T-S-K]<TISHU>
    Posts
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cosmin View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    travel mode for capitals
    Make it so.
    Unfortunately, Fozzie seemed opposed to the idea in the round table. CCP seems to view moving and power projection as one in the same. While obviously they are related, they really aren't. It's one thing to get hotdropped from across the galaxy. It's another to make moving so painfully that people would rather not login. I think with some changes to mechanics you could work out a system that allows nomadic alliances to move around in a relatively painless manner without letting the sov holding blocs abuse it (namely losing their sov quickly).
    What the fuck are you even talking about? What is your conception of "power projection" other than moving ships? Sending rude eve-mails?
    Power projection is moving caps from Deklein to Delve because PIZZA hit a LAWN R32 and back again. Power projection is staging in the middle of lowsec and dropping supers on anybody who dares enter a second cycle of siege. Power projection is dog piling on some retard titan who jumped instead of bridged. Contrary to what Marlona thinks, moving isn't power projection in and of itself. Power projection is moving rapidly.

    Notice I didn't say deploy. You should NOT be allowed to own something and stray more than a few light years from it. If you want space or moons, you should have to live in or around them. But if you want neither you shouldn't have to self-destruct or fire sale everything every time content dries up and you decide to move. I'm not saying nomadic alliances should be immune to fatigue, I'm just saying it should be easier to move around EVE if you have no desire to sit still.

  6. #106
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,420
    Contrary to what Marlona thinks, moving isn't power projection in and of itself. Power projection is moving rapidly.
    Maybe things have changed since I've been gone, but I'm pretty sure those who talk about moving want it to be easy and fast.

    Am I wrong?

  7. #107
    Donor Verite Rendition's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    4,154
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Contrary to what Marlona thinks, moving isn't power projection in and of itself. Power projection is moving rapidly.
    Maybe things have changed since I've been gone, but I'm pretty sure those who talk about moving want it to be easy and fast.

    Am I wrong?
    I suspect the issue is that people want the ability to move ships in a non-stupid manner, so that they can move to a new staging area. Power projection in that context is the ability to take an armed cap directly into a fight from wherever. Whereas what people want is some kind of unarmed carrier variant that can just be used to efficiently ferry ships but not get in a fight; a jump freighter for ships, as it were. (T2 Bowhead, anyone?)
    Tranquility (EVE) Influence Map
    Life is absurd, but with a little effort we can make it completely ridiculous

  8. #108
    Jester's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Elite, vicinity of Altair
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    After listening to the round table I do kinda agree in that I don't get the push for localized industry in nullsec. EVE needs more spaceships blowing up more than it needs those spaceships coming locally. If that other side of that means everybody sourcing from Jita then so be it.

    At one point Fozzie says they want localized industry because they want disrupting it to be a legitimate way to wage war. That's a great idea in the real world, but in a video game about blowing shit up that would just end wars faster with less shit blowing up.

    edit: I'm not saying they should undo the nullsec industry changes, I'm just saying they shouldn't put any more effort into developing it or nerfing logistics from Jita.
    Warning: Jester opinion alert.

    There's competing/cooperative CCP desires going on here:
    1) They want conflict to be local. They want you fighting groups in your same region or the next region over, not those four or eight regions away.
    2) There's always been a bloc of CCP devs that wants EVE to be "realistic" in terms of logistics. They don't want players just going to Jita for every single little thing, popping all of it into an uncatchable JF, then sending it halfway across the galaxy.

    Both of these come down to a unifying desire: they want people to live in their space and compete and fight with their neighbors. In any other game, a 100v100 or a 200v200 fight among neighbors would be pretty damn epic and EVE can support this reality easily, in twenty fights a day all over New Eden. Since the devs know that EVE can support this easily, they want that to be the big story and the big draw of EVE Online. And if we were talking about literally any other video game, that size fight would be more than enough, EVE could do it twenty times a day, and it wouldn't matter where new players started playing EVE because they'd hear about these fights going on all the time and be in a position to join the fun.

    The really entertaining thing: this is a great plan and in any other video game, it'd probably work fine.

    The problem is that EVE players have become blase about this. They have generally become spoiled to much bigger fights, 100v100 isn't enough for them any more and hasn't been for a long time. Those fights aren't "fun" unless they can win 100 to 0. The fun part for the individual players has been massive thousand person fleets being able to get from Deklein to Catch and fight battles for massive stakes. Issue: the game really can't support this (though Heaven knows Team Gridlock has tried), the coalition leaders don't want this, and new players couldn't be involved in this even if it were happening.

    So here we are betwixt and between. CCP has a plan that -- if they could talk the damn players into it -- would almost certainly reinvigorate New Eden for another decade. But the players are too stuck in the old ways and aren't interested. Kinda ironic, all things considered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    CCP seems to view moving and power projection as one in the same.
    Because it is.
    Well I guess this answers the question "What would it take for Marlona Sky to start posting again".
    That doesn't make him wrong.

    One of the devs made it pretty clear during the RT that they don't want people just loading a bunch of ships into a carrier, jumping it, having the pilots fly to the same location in unstoppable inties, and then just starting the fleet roam from there. Granted, it's not quite as effective as a titan bridge, but it directly incentivizes expanding a coalition's space farther (since you can reach the edges of your space more easily with an Entosis capable gang).

    The arguments for "well, how about giving jump bridges longer range?" and "how about giving jump bridges longer range the deeper they are in your space?" were shot down using the same justification.
    Ripard Teg (among others)... what's our new alliance called again?
    I was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer, to good effect. Or at least, that's what most of EVE believes.

  9. #109
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    After listening to the round table I do kinda agree in that I don't get the push for localized industry in nullsec. EVE needs more spaceships blowing up more than it needs those spaceships coming locally. If that other side of that means everybody sourcing from Jita then so be it.

    At one point Fozzie says they want localized industry because they want disrupting it to be a legitimate way to wage war. That's a great idea in the real world, but in a video game about blowing shit up that would just end wars faster with less shit blowing up.

    edit: I'm not saying they should undo the nullsec industry changes, I'm just saying they shouldn't put any more effort into developing it or nerfing logistics from Jita.
    Warning: Jester opinion alert.

    There's competing/cooperative CCP desires going on here:
    1) They want conflict to be local. They want you fighting groups in your same region or the next region over, not those four or eight regions away.
    2) There's always been a bloc of CCP devs that wants EVE to be "realistic" in terms of logistics. They don't want players just going to Jita for every single little thing, popping all of it into an uncatchable JF, then sending it halfway across the galaxy.

    Both of these come down to a unifying desire: they want people to live in their space and compete and fight with their neighbors. In any other game, a 100v100 or a 200v200 fight among neighbors would be pretty damn epic and EVE can support this reality easily, in twenty fights a day all over New Eden. Since the devs know that EVE can support this easily, they want that to be the big story and the big draw of EVE Online. And if we were talking about literally any other video game, that size fight would be more than enough, EVE could do it twenty times a day, and it wouldn't matter where new players started playing EVE because they'd hear about these fights going on all the time and be in a position to join the fun.

    The really entertaining thing: this is a great plan and in any other video game, it'd probably work fine.

    The problem is that EVE players have become blase about this. They have generally become spoiled to much bigger fights, 100v100 isn't enough for them any more and hasn't been for a long time. Those fights aren't "fun" unless they can win 100 to 0. The fun part for the individual players has been massive thousand person fleets being able to get from Deklein to Catch and fight battles for massive stakes. Issue: the game really can't support this (though Heaven knows Team Gridlock has tried), the coalition leaders don't want this, and new players couldn't be involved in this even if it were happening.

    So here we are betwixt and between. CCP has a plan that -- if they could talk the damn players into it -- would almost certainly reinvigorate New Eden for another decade. But the players are too stuck in the old ways and aren't interested. Kinda ironic, all things considered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bocephus View Post
    CCP seems to view moving and power projection as one in the same.
    Because it is.
    Well I guess this answers the question "What would it take for Marlona Sky to start posting again".
    That doesn't make him wrong.

    One of the devs made it pretty clear during the RT that they don't want people just loading a bunch of ships into a carrier, jumping it, having the pilots fly to the same location in unstoppable inties, and then just starting the fleet roam from there. Granted, it's not quite as effective as a titan bridge, but it directly incentivizes expanding a coalition's space farther (since you can reach the edges of your space more easily with an Entosis capable gang).

    The arguments for "well, how about giving jump bridges longer range?" and "how about giving jump bridges longer range the deeper they are in your space?" were shot down using the same justification.
    Damned if you do, damned if you don't. vOv

  10. #110
    Cosmin's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 14, 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6,741
    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    One of the devs made it pretty clear during the RT that they don't want people just loading a bunch of ships into a carrier, jumping it, having the pilots fly to the same location in unstoppable inties, and then just starting the fleet roam from there.
    Ah, fair enough, I wasn't aware of this. It does make sense, but it's a different thing to do the above VS deploying to a new region in search of new content. The latter is more about leaving home for an extended vacation as opposed to just darting there, do stuffs then come back asap.

    To be also fair I always disliked deployments simply because it's impossible not to forget something (and if I don't somebody else does and it's usually something quite essential, like HIC scripts) and then the fun begins, get somebody to buy one from <somewhere> and ferry it back.


    T2 Bowhead with jump drive and JF range to move ships sounds interesting until CCP will decide to move the cynos off stations and then it'll be a roll of the dice to move stuffs ^.^
    Guns make the news, science doesn't.

  11. #111

    Join Date
    August 22, 2014
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Verite Rendition View Post
    I suspect the issue is that people want the ability to move ships in a non-stupid manner, so that they can move to a new staging area. Power projection in that context is the ability to take an armed cap directly into a fight from wherever. Whereas what people want is some kind of unarmed carrier variant that can just be used to efficiently ferry ships but not get in a fight; a jump freighter for ships, as it were. (T2 Bowhead, anyone?)
    And how can you move a warship to some place conveniently (rapidly and easily) without allowing to use it right away once it got to place ?

    How do you make the difference between a hot drop, a long term move and a war deployment ?

    Power projection and logistic and tied together. The only difference is the intent, and a computer can say nothing about intents of people because there is no factual difference between the two.

  12. #112
    Super Ponerator Global Moderator Evelgrivion's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    12,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Bouh View Post
    Power projection and logistic and tied together. The only difference is the intent, and a computer can say nothing about intents of people because there is no factual difference between the two.
    Logistics and Ambushes are distinguished by time, which is why (and where) CCP chose to impose costs. Wormholes are excellent, but unreliable, opportunities for moving large amounts of supplies quickly, but they can't be depended on for a strategic attack.

  13. #113
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    19,796
    Quote Originally Posted by Evelgrivion View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bouh View Post
    Power projection and logistic and tied together. The only difference is the intent, and a computer can say nothing about intents of people because there is no factual difference between the two.
    Logistics and Ambushes are distinguished by time, which is why (and where) CCP chose to impose costs. Wormholes are excellent, but unreliable, opportunities for moving large amounts of supplies quickly, but they can't be depended on for a strategic attack.
    They still nerfed them though
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  14. #114

    Join Date
    August 22, 2014
    Posts
    153
    CCP posted some very interesting graphs on F&I :
    https://i.imgur.com/wofUlSI.png
    https://i.imgur.com/rovw7Xp.png

    Basically, there never has been as many capital action (ships destroyed by cap or cap destroyed) than since phoebe. Numbers are falling since summer began and are concerning, but as far as I can tell, data show that phoebe has been a dramatic success for cap activity. And even with the falling trend there still is more capital action now than in the last two years.

    Though there are some things I can't explain in these curves (mostly the sudden fall in ship killed by capitals since april, and the sudden fall of cap ratting since may).

    Second graph is blackops activity, and here it's a dramatic success and even summer barely affect the trend.
    Last edited by Bouh; August 14 2015 at 10:16:36 AM.

  15. #115
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    19,796
    Those graphs aren't particularly useful without y axis labels
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  16. #116

    Join Date
    November 11, 2013
    Location
    Thera
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Those graphs aren't particularly useful without y axis labels
    CCP Rise strikes again.

  17. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    January 30, 2013
    Location
    SVN
    Posts
    9,481
    More caps are used because fun police cant come and ruin your fight...
    https://i.imgur.com/Rvz5b6l.gif
    Careful not head hit on rock!
    laughs in Slovenian
    http://i.imgur.com/FCT2R1h.png

  18. #118
    Fara's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Bouh View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Verite Rendition View Post
    I suspect the issue is that people want the ability to move ships in a non-stupid manner, so that they can move to a new staging area. Power projection in that context is the ability to take an armed cap directly into a fight from wherever. Whereas what people want is some kind of unarmed carrier variant that can just be used to efficiently ferry ships but not get in a fight; a jump freighter for ships, as it were. (T2 Bowhead, anyone?)
    And how can you move a warship to some place conveniently (rapidly and easily) without allowing to use it right away once it got to place ?

    How do you make the difference between a hot drop, a long term move and a war deployment ?

    Power projection and logistic and tied together. The only difference is the intent, and a computer can say nothing about intents of people because there is no factual difference between the two.
    simple

    you invent a travel mode for a carrier w/o fatigue and old jumpranges, where you can't target anything or run ganglinks or w/e you can think of, eject(same in station) for x amount of days, no insurnace payout and top it off with a fancy glow so everyone will know the travel mode when they see it. I probably forgot a loophole, but just apply a fix in your head to it. The point is you can't do anything useful, except for move to a place w/ ur ships.

    If you fear that people will just self destruct/kill it to project power for 1 evening, well then 1b seems a fair price to pay imho (or just add more penalties like SP loss if you think it's not).

    This way lone players that need to catch up can do it, but an alliance can't just jump around for an evening without a huge sacrifice. Basically people would probably do it if 100 caps are tackled (great success), but not for 2 dreads shooting a pos somewhere.

    I'd sure accept 5 days of being stuck if it means I can actually go back to my alliance in a somewhat non retarded fashion. Maybe allow this for dreads too, but obviously not supercaps.

    Alliance deployments would very unlikely use this mechanic, as they have to worry about covering their supercaps somehow also being stuck to do nothing for X amount of days is really sucky for an entire group.


    This might be a bandaid fix, but it's something that can be done (and undone) very quick.
    Last edited by Fara; August 14 2015 at 01:13:57 PM.

  19. #119
    Donor Mike deVoid's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Nottingham, UK
    Posts
    6,900
    A T2 bowhead that instead of jump fatigue had a timed lock on the cargo (duration cargo is locked works the same way as jump fatigue) might be a nicer idea that a very strange carrier.

  20. #120

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Embracing Mediocrity
    Posts
    2,929
    Call it the Schrodinger, 50% chance of cargo being destroyed if opened early.

    (I don't actually support this idea.)
    Last edited by Boltorano; August 14 2015 at 02:19:17 PM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •