hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 23 of 28 FirstFirst ... 1320212223242526 ... LastLast
Results 441 to 460 of 550

Thread: CSM December Summit Minutes Released

  1. #441

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    8,253
    Removing local won't remove bots, do you honestly thing that spamming d-scan bots are any different to implement (they are why they made that delay in the scanner in the first place...) any watching for safe carebearing a human can do a bot can do better and without fatigue. And remember that you couldn't even awox a d-scan bot that safes on seeing any ships as it doesn't have information on standings to be abused.

    Even now with local 0.0 is almost empty of non-bot carebears, how do you think that making it more hazardous and :effort: will improve your access to roaming targets? And as most alliances seem to just sit docked untill someone comes and shits up the local and they can see they have overwhelming numbers before they undock how would removing the local improve your chances of getting a fight?

  2. #442
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,667
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Removing local won't remove bots, do you honestly thing that spamming d-scan bots are any different to implement (they are why they made that delay in the scanner in the first place...) any watching for safe carebearing a human can do a bot can do better and without fatigue. And remember that you couldn't even awox a d-scan bot that safes on seeing any ships as it doesn't have information on standings to be abused.

    Even now with local 0.0 is almost empty of non-bot carebears, how do you think that making it more hazardous and :effort: will improve your access to roaming targets? And as most alliances seem to just sit docked untill someone comes and shits up the local and they can see they have overwhelming numbers before they undock how would removing the local improve your chances of getting a fight?
    It would have to go hand in hand with Sov. Revision, making "sitting in station docked" costly. It's a huge problem with Sov, that the best and most frequently used tactic....is "ignore them".

    Ignored enemies should be able to destory things, things that cost isk and things that are useful and things the Sov. Holder would want to defend. If they can't or won't defend it, they shouldn't be the Sov Holder., as their not holding anything, the guys visiting doing the destruction are "holding" that space at that time.


  3. #443

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,578
    Easy solution to Fixing nullsec:

    1. Give anom/plex rats mwd, near universal long points (sleeper style, out to 150km to deal with tengus) and gates.
    2. Let nullsec rats drop moon mats, nerf moon output
    3. Adjust rewards so everything works out

    DONE


    Bots die, titan farming die, moongoo afk empires die, small gang peevpee live! Local: irrelevant.

  4. #444
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,503
    Quote Originally Posted by Shin_getter View Post
    Easy solution to Fixing nullsec:
    Wish you guys would stop thinking there is an easy solution to these problems. The solution will take many changes and will not fix anything overnight. The biggest problem is the players want shit instantly fixed over night and that is not going to happen. At the same time making one change and waiting two years to make another change is not an option either.

  5. #445

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Pizza delivery van
    Posts
    8,253
    Yeah, most of the "0.0 solutions" are just gankers wet dreams increasing the risk of 0.0 PVE without giving anything in return which isn't going to bring the ratters back from their hisec incursions. The whole concept of 0.0 money making and EHP based objectives needs a rethink and can't be solved with 3 lines of changes.

  6. #446

    Join Date
    August 18, 2011
    Posts
    2,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shin_getter View Post
    Easy solution to Fixing nullsec:
    Wish you guys would stop thinking there is an easy solution to these problems. The solution will take many changes and will not fix anything overnight. The biggest problem is the players want shit instantly fixed over night and that is not going to happen. At the same time making one change and waiting two years to make another change is not an option either.
    :iteration:

  7. #447
    pr0lurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    October 4, 2011
    Posts
    1,111
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Yeah, most of the "0.0 solutions" are just gankers wet dreams increasing the risk of 0.0 PVE without giving anything in return which isn't going to bring the ratters back from their hisec incursions. The whole concept of 0.0 money making and EHP based objectives needs a rethink and can't be solved with 3 lines of changes.
    I would start by removing that retarded officer change which for a loner as myself really :derped: my income prospects, reverse that and at least double the bounties belt rats give out - get people interested in them again

  8. #448

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,578
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Yeah, most of the "0.0 solutions" are just gankers wet dreams increasing the risk of 0.0 PVE without giving anything in return which isn't going to bring the ratters back from their hisec incursions. The whole concept of 0.0 money making and EHP based objectives needs a rethink and can't be solved with 3 lines of changes.
    There are perfectly fine ways it can be done (points to wh) but real problem is that the current set of players probably don't want that (or they'd be living somewhere else).

    Perfectly safe PvE with attention paid to local/intel channel/d-scan is just asking for bot land of combat evasion.

    Upping rewards to match risk is simple, really.

  9. #449
    Xiang Jiao's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,261
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Honestly, as seen in wormholes removing local doesn't drastically increase your chances of engaging in "elite pvp" ganking bears, why do people still moan that they want no local? Honestly what do you hope to accomplish with the change other than just sperging about it?
    It's stale and like others have said, it's too easy to track enemy movements. In the short run, I think it would decrease PvP at least in the sense of two big fleet finding each other and deciding whether or not to fight for a half hour. I'm not a big fan of d-scan as an intel gathering tool either. I think there should be ship modules that detect traces of other ships, like a sophisticated blood hound - a device that could tell you "There were 15 cruiser class vessels here five minutes ago, and it looks like they went that way." Possibly a tool to let you know that you are in the presence of cloaked ships within a certain distance depending on skills (this suggestion might get a lot of hate). Or maybe tools for hacking star gates to see what ships passed though recently (because all that data is registered, right?). There could be skills that make the data more specific, and skills that allow other players to use subterfuge to fool you into believing thier fleet composition is different. Anything that's more involved that just jumping in and seeing that those damn ninja ratters form a couple days ago are back again before you even load grid would be better than local.

    I think it would ultimately make the game more fun to play. I've always liked using Dotlan's data to make decisions in roaming fleets, but you are constantly working with old data. Why not improve the game by offering some of the same functionality but make it more useful, so that players can use it to enrich their PvP experience?

    Like Marlona said, there are no easy solutions, but for me, a quick outline for a change would be:

    1) Remove local...
    2) Get rid of dscan or roll it into a skill based tracking system.
    3) Also, add intelligence gathering tools X, Y, and Z.
    4) Profit!
    Last edited by Xiang Jiao; January 30 2012 at 02:20:51 AM.

  10. #450
    Banned
    Join Date
    April 18, 2011
    Location
    Only one here to predict a win for God Emperor
    Posts
    12,463
    Quote Originally Posted by Xiang Jiao View Post
    1) Remove local...
    2) Get rid of dscan or roll it into a skill based tracking system.
    3) Also, add intelligence gathering tools X, Y, and Z.
    4) Profit!
    Yes, putting 'remove local' as step one shows how deeply you guys have thought this over...
    Are you an engineer? -- Quack

  11. #451

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,578
    The problem with sov space isn't that fixing it may require complex mechanics, but there are contradictory demands placed on it that is unresolved:

    1. Must small gang
    2. Must blobs (just look at the development effort into say, TiDi)
    3. Carebears must be safe, safe and safe unless they are retarded (dumber then bots) otherwise pve is just farmed by pvpers
    4. Null Must pay more then highsec
    5. Null Must not pay enough because players aren't suppose to afford personal supers ever.
    6. Highsec must pay enough so players can live comfortably on its income
    7. Structures is important, because it shows up on sov map
    8. Structures is too boring, does nothing and is not important
    9. Fleet combat should be accessible to all
    10. Cheap ships that does fleet combat obviously is broken
    11. Sov should provide intel and enables defense
    12. Sov should not help defense and allow afk empires
    13. Sov should require constant maintenance by players
    14. Small groups with no manpower/timezone coverage should be able to carve out a piece of the sov pie without joining a blob
    15. There obviously should be end game content that is expensive and powerful
    16. Obviously expensive and powerful assets are always broken
    17. Logistics is painful
    18. Easy logistics means large blocks that is obviously bad (i'm not sure about this one)
    19. PvE is boring, passive income it is!
    20. Passive income obviously broken and we need more spaceships as targets
    21. Sov should have independent economies
    22. There should be regional resource differences
    23. Bots are bad
    24. Requiring more intelligence to fly a ship then a bot is bad

    .....etc etc
    -------------------
    If someone can sort out exactly what sov space is suppose to be then there might be a solution, otherwise it is just incoherent marginal modifications that is more random walk then anything.

  12. #452
    Donor Sponk's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    AU TZ
    Posts
    11,503
    ^ Not a terrible post
    Contract stuff to Seraphina Amaranth.

    "You give me the awful impression - I hate to have to say - of someone who hasn't read any of the arguments against your position. Ever."


  13. #453
    Xiang Jiao's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,261
    Quote Originally Posted by Sponk View Post
    ^ Not a terrible post
    Seconding this. I like the way that Shin shows the spectrum of opinions (both pro and con). I think some of them are nutty, but that's why we call them opinions. It's important that CCP look at the game at a high level like this before considering big. sweeping changes, which are supposed to be coming soon, right? It would be a shame, for example, if they gave null sec and sov a really huge iteration, but then failed to look at low sec or faction warfare at all. The same goes for wormholes. Hopefully, Dust514 will engage the entire landscape of Eve, not just one isolated aspect of it.

  14. #454
    kyrieee's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    derp
    Posts
    2,695
    Quote Originally Posted by depili View Post
    Honestly, as seen in wormholes removing local doesn't drastically increase your chances of engaging in "elite pvp" ganking bears, why do people still moan that they want no local? Honestly what do you hope to accomplish with the change other than just sperging about it?
    Scanning and ganking anom runners in WHs is way more effort than just roaming 0.0, but when you find someone you are much more likely to kill them. No local does make it much easier to kill PvErs, it's just harder to find them in WHs (not in the system itself, but finding a system with good targets).

  15. #455
    Marlona Sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    7,503
    The difference is huge difference between the type of activity of the locals in unknown space than null space. You can gather better intel faster in null on an enemy than some random corp in unknown space. In unknown you get some random corp that you know nothing about. In null you can profile, do research, etc and they are not going to be gone the next day and you have to start over with some new target.

  16. #456
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    18,323
    Quote Originally Posted by Marlona Sky View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Shin_getter View Post
    Easy solution to Fixing nullsec:
    Wish you guys would stop thinking there is an easy solution to these problems. The solution will take many changes and will not fix anything overnight...
    Says the guy who handwaved away the issues with his easy solution of removing insurance.

  17. #457

    Join Date
    April 11, 2011
    Posts
    2,578
    I have to admit to not know very much about living in sov space since I know I can't stand it after trying it for a few month and had enough fail CTAs. What I do know about all the issues surrounding it is this:

    1. A huge part of the complaints about sov space and other game elements involves people that does not live there, does not want to go there and doesn't do much that is at all directly influenced by sov space.
    2. The large set of complaints involves people that live there that want to nerf other people that live there for whatever reason.
    3. Finally, the players that login and not forum whore are mostly okay with the trade offs of sov space compared to alternatives, even if they are a minority.

    There is just a lot of objections to gameplay elements on moral, as opposed to experiential elements. Many players would only rarely see a ratting titan or engage highly evasive bots in the depth of droneland, while technetium, details of alliance structures or T2bpo are an abstraction that have very little to do with the spaceship game they play but they still have something to say about those topics. This is a kind of spaceship group identity (nationalism?) with the ethical theory backing it. You can say its politics all the way down, and someone really could to do some studies and produce coherent political theories out of the mess.

    Of course, that is what Eve is about on some level, since the gameplay can be said to be quite bad (relatively) and the most unique element of the game is blurring lolRP and assigning players real roles in player defined large scale organizations, it makes sense that a real political and moral consciousness develops.

    ------
    Modifying the game is tricky when most of the complains involves OTHER PEOPLE's experiences. Non-incursion runners whine about incursion income. Subcap pilots whine about supercapital pilots. NPC null/WH/small gang folks whine about the lack of small gang in sov blob space. Non-NC whine about NC bridge network. Non-drake pilots whine about drake fleets. Pirates whine about easy logistics done by a completely different type of players. Blob fleets whine about how they can't get into a wormhole (lol CSM). Careless highsec guys complain about suicide gankers. Miners complain about dronelanders. Carebears complain about AFK cloakers.....

    Fixing the game is infinitely easier if players are trying to fix their own experiences as opposed to "zomg those "insert group" is so terribad and exploiting the shitz out of everything and should die/nerf/ban/nuke/dd/etc."

    Fixing things like, say, gallente ships is so much easier, because the complaints (solo/small gang pilots, mostly) and those that receive modified game play is the same. If you are designing elements across different type and class of players, I don't think "good solutions" really is possible because players that opposes me are obviously all terrible and evil.

    This is made worst because what players say (based on some concept of right and wrong) and what they enjoy (that causes them to login) might not even be the same thing, not to mention higher order effects of suggested proposals. I mean, most people would probably be embarrassed to say/admit/acknowledge "Look man, I spend the last 6 month doing boring pve shit so I can wtfpwn everyone effortless imbaboat of doom that autowins since it generates so many tears" and will probably find some other arguments against proposed game changes if it comes up. There is just many things in the game that some players enjoy but can not admit it enmass, like mining, flying that covops with a tp to whore every killmail, elite "gate camping pvpeeeeeeeee" with a dedicated rsebo scorp helping, corp theft and the likes.
    Last edited by Shin_getter; January 30 2012 at 11:03:46 AM.

  18. #458
    The Pube Whisperer Maximillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,274
    Probably the easiest way to change the dynamic is to give everyone bots. These bots mine asteroids and moons, transport stuff to stations, etc. They also cannot log off or cloak and are not located within mass HP structures or force-fields.

    The problem with EvE's design was that when they put in castles they made it impossible to burn down the fields if the guys in the castle wouldn't come out and fight. I am not talking about a few raiders being able to destroy everything - small forces do small damage, larger forces larger damage, and so on.

    This would also have the benefit of getting players out of tedious tasks like mining or logistics, and instead turn them into the commanders of warships.

    I realise that this would be a big change, but I always felt that the whole Industry side of EvE was just a time sink to disguise an initial lack of content. The problem is that any boring, repetitive job a human can do a bot can do far better.

    So give every player a NPC management skill, give corporations NPCs in systems that they have the appropriate structures in. These NPCs would beaver away bringing in a constant trickle of resources but would be unable to protect themselves.

  19. #459
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    7,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Maximillian View Post
    Probably the easiest way to change the dynamic is to give everyone bots. These bots mine asteroids and moons, transport stuff to stations, etc. They also cannot log off or cloak and are not located within mass HP structures or force-fields.

    The problem with EvE's design was that when they put in castles they made it impossible to burn down the fields if the guys in the castle wouldn't come out and fight. I am not talking about a few raiders being able to destroy everything - small forces do small damage, larger forces larger damage, and so on.

    This would also have the benefit of getting players out of tedious tasks like mining or logistics, and instead turn them into the commanders of warships.

    I realise that this would be a big change, but I always felt that the whole Industry side of EvE was just a time sink to disguise an initial lack of content. The problem is that any boring, repetitive job a human can do a bot can do far better.

    So give every player a NPC management skill, give corporations NPCs in systems that they have the appropriate structures in. These NPCs would beaver away bringing in a constant trickle of resources but would be unable to protect themselves.
    You know, I was just thinking this. The concept that so many things in EVE could be done by script, is actually immersion breaking in some instances... (would a trans-human civilisation really be getting their hands dirty doing anything they didn't enjoy?)

    And Shin is kinda spot on, but the debate about what 0.0 and low sec should be, and to who is part of the debate afiak. Greyscale said he wanted 0.0 to have the most eclectic mix of people because he believed the game is richer when you have positive interaction between bears and pvp'ers for instance. So far, most of the player base, and surprisingly (and disappointingly) Seleene, have been advocating things that have improved little and built up on most of the shit we hate doing.

  20. #460
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,667
    Quote Originally Posted by Maximillian View Post
    The problem with EvE's design was that when they put in castles they made it impossible to burn down the fields if the guys in the castle wouldn't come out and fight.
    Brilliantly put. +1 and + Rep.


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
  •