Player Features and Ideas Discussion

TBH, I've always found "JF flat price any range" to be kind of weird anyway. (On the other hand, it made calculating prices easy. :p) Anyway, I suspect this is an effect that CCP is very much in favor of. If we figure that shipping fees generally bill for time, the implication of flat-rate shipping is that, logistically, all points are approximately the same distance apart, and this is exactly the nullsec supercapital blob complaint.

I'm sure you'll make it work, since you sound passionate about having efficient, profitable low-sec freight.

I told you, history has already been rewritten so we were always the carrier and supercap blobbers.

I can recall several wars when we did not have the most isk on field. That we have done nothing but win for the last few years is something different.



That makes you a bad pilot. I'm training up for a dread because of these changes.

Let's hear you say that to the kamikaze pilots of olde, or the pilots who sank ships by hitting them with a single torpedo launched from a small plane 1/1000th the weight or cost of the BS.

Or, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6so9AT4UydQ


Good thing caps aren't meant to be used casually. Scout, bring a subcap fleet or sit in your ship and quiver like a scared mouse because it's too dangerous out there, what with all those dangerous frigates (or in the case of supercaps, HICs).

I adore the fact that HICs will stop caps from taking gates when you're focus pointed.

So much drama over such little changes. Learn to adapt like previous players in years past.
What about "things change, and you will need to change with them" don't players understand.

Its called adapting. Our species has done it for many years.
These self-serving alternate ideas don't help much either.

It has been far too easy for a single organization to cross the game universe to influence nearly anything they wanted to.
These are initial changes to get players used to what will be coming later.


The way you played before is over. If this doesn't do it CCP will do more to make it so.
Get used to it and find new ways to have fun. Its not hard. (like they nano nerf whiners who didn't rage:quit for reals did)


And yes, it is their game, not yours, no matter how many game months/years you have played on your 20+ accounts.
Although they will take reasonable feedback at times, they don't have too.

Yes,... it is CCP's game. And no, the customer isn't always right, even though they insist they are, nearly all the time.

Sgt Ocker, do you think that Capital ships being able to cross the entire Eve universe very quickly to hot drop cruisers in an issue?

If you don't, then you have made the right decision to quit the game.

If you do, then this is exactly what CCP is trying to fix.

I think eve needs more effective guerilla warfare instruments, able to strategically counter supercapital forces to some extent. And I think Black Ops should be boosted for that (including more range like +2 l.y., less or no fatigue, +10..+15% overall tanking ability). Plus covert logis would be good too, with some drawbacks in comparison to 'normal' logis.

No. T3s and interceptors having bubble immunity's bad enough as it is, we don't need more ship types with that functionality.


No. They already have a get out of/avoid jail card in the jumpdrive, they don't need even more help.

Don't want to get caught on a gate bubble? Use the subcap support fleet. It's what it's there for. Or circumvent the system by using the jumpdrive. Or nut up and go in anyways and see what happens.

Edit: Hurr spelling is hard mmkay

The only problem with that is that turning capitals into overgrown ceptors is contrary to part of the purpose of these changes, and removes the added risk to them that CCP wants in the mix.

Its almost like having your old work car that you drive every day (sub caps and such) and then the nice car that sits in the garage waiting on a special occasion (cap combat ships) in order to be driven.

CCP wants folks to use those "special" cars in a more strategic manner, not as the current ho-hum everyday vehicle.
proposing "adjustments" to the ships that nullify the entire point of the changes CCP is making will only serve to bolster the current status quo which CCP has already stated they wish to change.

I know that because of language differences some folks might not get the analogy, and for that I apologize in advance, that's simply the best way I know how to say it. :)

o/
Celly Smunt

Because despite what people say they want, safety and stability trumps fights. Everyone wants fights, but no one is willing to risk their home or a large chunk of their assets for it.

Safety in number is a thing. And it will always be a thing, regardless of what cap changes happen.

Imagine a pocket of systems where 5 non-blue 20-man corps live. If two of them blue each other they are now at an advantage both defensively and offensively vs the others. Not only that but now they offer more safety and stability for recruitment. The other 3 will then likely respond by forming their own `coalition` of 60 people because that allows them to regain safety (relatively speaking).

But no space is an island, so the people living in the next set of systems over will notice this 60 man coalition and feel they need blues enough to overcome/counter it should it choose to invade. So they will seek out a greater group of blues. And so on and so forth until you end up with a blue donut.




Please realize that these changes are hurting us smaller groups significantly more than they will the large coalitions.

If you really want to make null viable for more smaller entities then the sov changes are what is needed. The influence of military might over sov holding needs to be reduced if you want small entities to shake-up null. Slowing down projection just means that if someone was to try and take (or even take) some space from either of the large coalitions they might hold it for 10 days instead of 1. In either case it's still not worth the effort and expense for us to do so knowing there is nothing we can do against their military might when they get around to bringing it to teach us a lesson.

As an interim thing, it may be more helpful to look at the way capital repairs / huge tanks compound in (super-)capital fleets in order to make it viable to contest (super)capital fleets with things accessible to smaller entities (like battleships). The huge tank means without massive alpha the target will get reps. And the huge amount of reps means once it does it won't be overcome-able. So without either a comparative fleet (which small entities don't have the capability to get) or extreme out-blobbing there is no way to counter coalition super fleets, even if your travel changes reduce their size to 1/2 or 1/3 or 1/4.

I would suggest limiting the number of capital reps that a (super)capital can receive (or adding stacking penalties to capital reps) and looking into ways to limit the ability to both apply extremely strong damage and deliver massive reps at the same time in a way that can't be easily refit on the fly.

Another idea would be specialized anti-(super)capital modules for battleships that `dampen` their repairs or their drone control, etc.


Species adapt because IRL there's not the option to play something else that is more enjoyable. That logic doesn't apply to a world where participation is voluntary for purposes of fun.

I am all for changes, however, but the problem is that these specific changes will hurt far more the small entities they're advertised as helping and just further entrench those with most ISK, blues and supers. The ability to project is a problem, but not nearly as much of a problem compared to how nearly-invulnerable even a 10-20 (super)capital fleet is and the fact that a small entity can do nothing to contest it once it gets there.