These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Which features should be added to Rubicon, and what is still to be announced?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aivo Dresden
State War Academy
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-09-28 14:13:13 UTC
double post - Removed
Elzon1
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#22 - 2013-09-28 18:06:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Elzon1
KuroVolt wrote:
Elzon1 wrote:

1. Sov system based on player activity in a system over a week's time span while contested. This negates annoying timers and boring structure grinding aside from stations (separate from sov system). Also, inactive systems can be taken with ease. No waiting on a preset number of days to upgrade your system. You can upgrade it as soon as it's your's.


How would you make this work with alliances that prefer the NRDS style of play?

Or would you just cut out that style of play? effectively throwing out a whole bunch of sand out of the sandbox.


Easy enough. When a neut comes into one of your systems and wishes to rat or whatever the activity is that is required to contest a system's sov a message pops up if he/she is in a different alliance from the current system's owner. The message asks the neut if he/she would like to contest the system's sov. If the neut responds "yes" then a week long countdown begins to see who's alliance will contribute the most activity to either take or keep the system in question.

The neut always has the option to select "no".
Solhild
Doomheim
#23 - 2013-09-29 19:05:38 UTC
I would have the new drone UI to be in place by this expansion - where we can move groups of drones to the HUD and manage like weapons. Does anyone have any info on this?
Igor Nappi
Doomheim
#24 - 2013-09-29 19:43:52 UTC
Rebalance drone stats, mainly make Amarr non-sentry drones useful. Shouldn't be terribly complicated and would be sort of quick band-aid before more serious drone revamps that have been hinted at.

Furthermore, I think that links must be removed from the game.
Mra Rednu
Vanishing Point.
#25 - 2013-09-29 19:56:10 UTC

Drone faction loot table and some decent exploration sites.

LP store upgrade.
Arthur Aihaken
Kenshin Academia.
Kenshin Shogunate.
#26 - 2013-09-29 20:56:03 UTC
Custom paint schemes.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#27 - 2013-09-30 00:09:56 UTC
When CCP Guard and those devs started talking about these new anchorable structures I was pretty surprised and happy. Thrilled really. The bitterness of this vet vaporized. That, ceptors being immune to bubbles, and and the fact that I think marauders will be replacing macherials and vindicators as pirate battleships is really going to shake things up in low and null sec I think. I think this is going to be a really significant expansion.

With that as context, it's hard for me to think of what else to add because that's already pretty good. I would like anchorable mines and a module that takes up either two low, mid, or high slots and gives you a different slot of your choice.

Big smile

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Tesal
#28 - 2013-09-30 00:47:41 UTC
Elzon1 wrote:
KuroVolt wrote:
Elzon1 wrote:

1. Sov system based on player activity in a system over a week's time span while contested. This negates annoying timers and boring structure grinding aside from stations (separate from sov system). Also, inactive systems can be taken with ease. No waiting on a preset number of days to upgrade your system. You can upgrade it as soon as it's your's.


How would you make this work with alliances that prefer the NRDS style of play?

Or would you just cut out that style of play? effectively throwing out a whole bunch of sand out of the sandbox.


Easy enough. When a neut comes into one of your systems and wishes to rat or whatever the activity is that is required to contest a system's sov a message pops up if he/she is in a different alliance from the current system's owner. The message asks the neut if he/she would like to contest the system's sov. If the neut responds "yes" then a week long countdown begins to see who's alliance will contribute the most activity to either take or keep the system in question.

The neut always has the option to select "no".


Goons would be able to exploit that to ridiculous levels.
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2013-09-30 01:41:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Johan Civire
the only negative I can find is your skill updating not in game. There is a reason why we "playing a game and not farming sp and go offline for other 15 days after the skill is finish we return in game" If you play like this more then a year you need to stop playing then , then this eve game is not your cup of tea. For the rest I agree.
Felicity Love
Doomheim
#30 - 2013-09-30 05:12:59 UTC
I'd like to see some Xmas decorations in the CQ... some tinsel and lights strung over the big screens, a small Xmas tree on the table in front of the couch... and some mistletoe over the doorway as you come down the gangway from the hangar.

Or a heavy bomber... the size of a cruiser but with 2 bomb launchers. Twisted

"EVE is dying." -- The Four Forum Trolls of the Apocalypse.   ( Pick four, any four. They all smell.  )
Soulpirate
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#31 - 2013-09-30 05:24:51 UTC
WiS
Cade Windstalker
#32 - 2013-09-30 06:51:14 UTC
I think if we were going to get an SOE Battleship with Rubicon they'd have announced it with the other two, even if all they had was concept art. Doesn't make a ton of sense to announce two ships out of an obvious possible three and not even tease the third one.

We may get one in the future but it would make sense for them to want to re-balance the existing Pirate Battleships first before throwing a new hull into the mix, which will inevitably be compared to ships that were designed at a different time, using a different philosophy, and are in-general, poorly balanced against each other and other battleships.

Fix Lag wrote:
CCP gets paid no matter what if you're training skills, so why not make it less of a hassle?


Because getting you to log into the game makes it far more likely that you'll actually go out and play. Maybe you see a ship that you wanted to use, maybe you get an corp message saying there's a fleet forming, or maybe you just decide that as long as you're here you may as well un-dock. Overall though this is about the play-styles CCP wants to support since the main groups affected would be character sellers and people training alt characters, besides the obvious demographic of "people paying to not play the game".

Probably of more concern is opening up something like the skill training queue to inputs from something other than the client. Opening up any piece of the game like that has security concerns that go along with it.
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2013-09-30 10:38:54 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...

Probably of more concern is opening up something like the skill training queue to inputs from something other than the client. Opening up any piece of the game like that has security concerns that go along with it.


I'm not really arguing with you but...

iirc - when eve-gate was put forth, one of the statements from CCP was that they were looking at enabling skill queue manipulation from there along with all the other things it allows.

It already allows access to a great deal of information, requiring all the in-game account details so I don't see security nor the notion of queue manipulation as being a concern nor stopping point.

Again, I'm not arguing about it, just pointing out that it has been discussed and was seen as a potentially viable option by CCP in the past.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-11-15 16:20:30 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Corp and Alliance logos on ships would be cool..


This +10000, although I would just display the alliance logo

Would you like to know more?
BLACK-STAR
#35 - 2013-11-15 16:31:13 UTC
Stargate construction is an interesting concept. Might pump some bloodshed or give huge conquered systems a pulse in mobilization or campaigns.
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#36 - 2013-11-15 16:39:11 UTC
BLACK-STAR wrote:
Stargate construction is an interesting concept. Might pump some bloodshed or give huge conquered systems a pulse in mobilization or campaigns.


Why stop at stargates. I'm still waiting for a titan-launched Genesis(tm) device that will allow players to create planets, or transform an existing planet from one type into another (while zapping the PI emplacements on it in the process)....give the device a long spin-up timer once deployed for added conflict generation for extra win...

Would you like to know more?
Guttripper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-11-15 16:45:24 UTC
Minor graphic enhancement - when your ship begins accelerating and reaches maximum speed, your burners / engines are brighter and larger in appearance and as you begin slowing down, the muzzles begin closing in, reducing the streamer affect until you stop and the whole is nearly dark. Perhaps change the color slightly between the two extremes - accelerating with a whiter affect while decelerating is a darker affect.
Solstice Project
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2013-11-15 17:10:01 UTC
I want NPCs to stop spawning and instead have them warp in,
just like ******* everybody else.

Add it.
Previous page12