hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 39 of 39

Thread: Leboe for CSM

  1. #21

    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Location
    snuff bocks lololo
    Posts
    790
    What are your ideas on boosters? Sweeping gay changes like was on sisi? or smaller more intelligent tweaking?
    psycho freak > BBC fleet


  2. #22
    Smuggo
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Mfume View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    No one in NPC space wants to ever have to log in and then spend hours repping their station so they can use basic services.
    then they should be willing to log in and fight.
    You know you can be willing to log in and fight and also not want to spend hours doing boring shit.

    Lets consider these possible scenarios:

    Lets say me and my buddies set up a small corp. We've got 15 people on the roster, about 8 when you strip out alts, but only 4 play regularly and we never usually have more than 2-3 online at once. We live in V4 in Syndicate, and while the region is inhabited by a number of different entities of varying sizes there are several others similar to us.

    I get home on a Friday night, looking forward to spendng a few hours on eve cause I've been busy all week and don't get to play much. I log in to find Goons/TEST/other faggots have decided they were bored and are disabling station services across Syndicate. A couple of my buddies are online, but lets face it we are completely powerless in the face of that kind of force and so we just have to stay docked up for the duration. No fights were had.

    The other likely scenario is that I get home on Friday ready to wreck up the spacelanes only to find someone incapped all our station services while we were asleep. I was gonna try out my awesome rifter fit but now I have to sit there spending hours repping services which took a supercap blob only minutes to disable. I think I can't be fucked and go play something else.

    While some of the larger NPC 0.0 entities might be able to handle this kind of thing (though I can't think of many), there are a wide variety of different corps that live in NPC 0.0 and they add to its variety and make it a more interesting place than is the case with the AFK empires that plague sov space. By making it possible for supercap blobs to fuck about with their stations, you will simply drive these entities out to nearby lowsec or WH space and make the 0.0 game even shittier than it currently is.

  3. #23
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by BOOLER View Post
    What are your ideas on boosters? Sweeping gay changes like was on sisi? or smaller more intelligent tweaking?
    They can do the sweeping changes such as removing side effects completely, but they just can't do it without adjusting production at the same time. Gas harvesting is a really boring mechanic, and thats pretty much the root of the problem.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Location
    snuff bocks lololo
    Posts
    790
    Quote Originally Posted by Leboe View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by BOOLER View Post
    What are your ideas on boosters? Sweeping gay changes like was on sisi? or smaller more intelligent tweaking?
    They can do the sweeping changes such as removing side effects completely, but they just can't do it without adjusting production at the same time. Gas harvesting is a really boring mechanic, and thats pretty much the root of the problem.
    Im not sure it being a boring mechanic is enough reason to change it, I have never had fun making isk really. Are you of the opinion that boosters should be available to all and p much everyone pops one everytime they undock? or a middle ground somewhere from where we are at the mo?

    I suppose the only things I would really change is the volume of the gas and the drawbacks associated with each booster, but that my own personal selfish opinion, would just want a better idea of what you would push for if you got my vote!
    psycho freak > BBC fleet


  5. #25
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    The changes proposed last year turned boosters into the new faction ammo, and thats the last thing eve needs in general. I would support toning down boosters (bonus and side effects) if thats part of what it takes to make them more popular (something CCP wants to see, judging by the fact they considered change at all) Even synth boosters, which should be used by everyone all the time, aren't. Theres some sort of disconnect there.

    But I think the main bottlenecks are cost and availability. I'm not afraid to support changes that will cut into my profit, because thats not the agenda I'm here to push. I think CCP recently tweeted that around 200 people make boosters at all, I have no idea if thats considered low, or the kind of stat CCP is okay with. Every time someone suggests using incarna for smuggling/back alley trades, I nearly lose it. That will never be a viable alternative, even compared to the broken mechanics most people use for trading boosters now (contracts that don't work for WTS, but work for WTB) the mechanics could use a look, as long as its not incarna'd.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    April 27, 2011
    Location
    snuff bocks lololo
    Posts
    790
    Given a choice I would like the gasses available outside of their low and null constellations, albeit much rarer or in smaller quantities. And take out the random nature of drawbacks. Reducing the boost you get for them I think is a bad idea also.

    Not getting in to too much detail, how would you feel about pushing for some set drawbacks that always happen every time but reduce the actual drawback %? meaning you get visible benefits and drawbacks every time that are predictable and you can account for?

    Im not intending to sound pushy or anything I just want to make sure someone I vote for will have similar ideas to the booster trade as me, I have several accounts so will be splitting my votes between a druggy and a lowsec pirate
    psycho freak > BBC fleet


  7. #27
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    Yeah, a set drawback would be more appealing than a random one. Sadly I don't use standard or improved... I'm cheap and don't make much off making the darn things.

  8. #28
    Donor Sponk's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    AU TZ
    Posts
    11,439
    If they want random, then having the drawbacks have random durations (independent of the booster duration) would assuage their obsession with RNGs.
    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."


  9. #29
    Donor Lorkin Desal's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    2,561
    am interviewing leboe for podgoo tonight. if any other candidate want to chat get in touch with me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Virtuozzo
    The evolution of the meme. From shipspinning to meatspinning.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    781
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    You are terrible and clearly misunderstand the role NPC 0.0 should play. It should serve people who want to just log in and cause some trouble. No one in NPC space wants to ever have to log in and then spend hours repping their station so they can use basic services.
    Because roaming 100+ jumps w/ 30 duders and only ganking some poor soloers/busting camps is teh most fun gameplay you can get in eve, amirite?
    I honestly cant understand the whine around destructible stations.
    Yeah constant structure grinding is some gay ass shit, we all agree on that. Thats (among other things) why we're not in some huge powerblock coalition.
    BUT
    The kind of PvP NPC 0.0 corps/alliances tend to thrive on centers around consentual gang vs. gang engagements.
    I'm actually witness to how this kind of PvP is dying right now in the south (talking medscale fleets of 20-40 dudes).
    Question is - how do you encourage players to
    1. live near you
    2. be willing to engage you on somewhat equal terms (and that includes actually taking roaming gangs out and not just sit on undock w/ carriers etc.)
    Certainly a good NPC 0.0 candidate must do better than just saying "no destructible stations".

    I'm not necessarily supporting the idea, just dont really care.
    I mean even if a change like that ends up being on TQ and ends up being terrible - so what? Just rebase to lowsec adjacent to NPC 0.0 entrance system, problem solved.

    edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    we never usually have more than 2-3 online at once.
    Why live in NPC 0.0 though when you could base out of Jita, not have any hassle w/ logistics and roam the whole map?
    I guess i get why you're against destructible stations. Its just - i personally always thought of NPC 0.0 as of space for entities smaller than Sov-holding coalitions, but bigger than lowsec corps/ smallscale pvpers like Genos etc.
    Last edited by n0th; February 28 2012 at 03:49:22 PM.

  11. #31
    Smuggo
    Guest
    I don't think anyone said anything about destroyable stations in NPC 0.0 (not even the current CSM are that fucking stupid).

  12. #32

    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Posts
    781
    Yeah, destroyable services. I've read your post a second time, i think i can agree with your ~diversity of NPC 0.0~ argument.

    Still, the thing is - basing a CSM campaign on "against NPC 0.0 Nerf" is a bad idea IMHO. At least Leboe could've come up with some concept of how NPC 0.0 could be tweaked to encourage (semi-consentual) PvP of all sorts. Not because there is a chance of CCP doing it the next term, but just so potential constituents can see if he would be a decent representative.

    Voting Prom anyway, he is p much responsible for me having fun soloing in assaults post-buff. No other candidate can beat that
    Last edited by n0th; February 28 2012 at 04:13:12 PM.

  13. #33
    prometheus's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Ontario
    Posts
    3,863
    Quote Originally Posted by n0th View Post
    Voting Prom anyway, he is p much responsible for me having fun soloing in assaults post-buff. No other candidate can beat that
    Quote Originally Posted by Frug View Post
    Prom is right and you're dumb.
    Latest Video - The Inner Zone
    YouTube - LiveStream

  14. #34
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    Quote Originally Posted by n0th View Post
    Yeah, destroyable services. I've read your post a second time, i think i can agree with your ~diversity of NPC 0.0~ argument.

    Still, the thing is - basing a CSM campaign on "against NPC 0.0 Nerf" is a bad idea IMHO. At least Leboe could've come up with some concept of how NPC 0.0 could be tweaked to encourage (semi-consentual) PvP of all sorts. Not because there is a chance of CCP doing it the next term, but just so potential constituents can see if he would be a decent representative.

    Voting Prom anyway, he is p much responsible for me having fun soloing in assaults post-buff. No other candidate can beat that
    the way to encourage more consensual PvP is for you to stop being a pussy in space.

  15. #35

    Join Date
    September 16, 2011
    Location
    Origin.
    Posts
    629
    Quote Originally Posted by Leboe View Post
    the way to encourage more consensual PvP is for you to stop being a pussy in space.
    That seems needlessly hostile given what he wrote...? Is there some kind of background going on here or are you seriously that angry he suggested you expand on your platform?

  16. #36
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    Consensual PvP isnt a problem of mechanics, as there is nothing in game to support it. You'd be tasked with implementing a system where none exists, and that much effort needs to go to lowsec. Making up new gameplay paradigms isnt in the scope of the CSM.

    The only thing you can do right now to make yourself more likely to get into such fights is by being more open to them yourself. Things like gimping your fleet comp and generally fighting out numbered are the way to go about it. Its not a personal attack, its that the majority of eve is risk-averse and that is a reality. I don't see an easy way to diminish the risk of PvP (with the intent of encouraging more of it) without diminishing the impact at the same time.

  17. #37
    Leboe's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,951
    In case anyone's following this thread, voting's open.

    http://community.eveonline.com/counc...Vote.asp?c=471

  18. #38
    Sudden's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Stimulus - RK
    Posts
    598
    bump

  19. #39
    Aloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 18, 2011
    Location
    Groon
    Posts
    494
    Got both my votes :V

    Press X to uguu~

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
  •