Player Features and Ideas Discussion

It was a constructive rant on why people are so mad. Censoring any negative feedback and stating that players who are upset with such lacking thought from developers is tragic is removing half of this debate.

Look at other games that are regularly updated such as HON where the Devs have actually withdrawn from the idea of mass content pacing in place of quality fixes and you will see huge player support. I personally think these changes are very poorly thought out and that the devs are rushing through simplistic and poorly thought out changes rather than competent changes that match the core fundamentals this game was founded upon.

If we aren't allowed to voice this fact in this thread, then it just conceeds the point that the Devs are content to push through more **** changes for the sake of change rather than change for the good of the game.

You cannot argue that these changes are good. They are horribly thought out and to try and iterate on poor thoughts is much more useless than asking for a restart and proper solutions.

This whole arguement goes back to addressing core problems in the game. Rather than fix those problems first, CCP is trying to balance ships around problematic features. It makes no sense to balance ships around poor core fundamentals that have developed over the past 5 years.

Fix WEBS, fix TRACKING, Fix CAPITALS, fix Sig Radius at range, Fix missiles properly, Fix Jamming, Fix Blobbing, Fix 0.0 Mechanics, , and stop wasting our time with these other changes.

I've watched Every ship thread so far, and in every one of those threads, constructive feedback has been cast aside almost completely and the bulk concept of ship designs has remained. How can you expect us to feel good knowing that you are just ramming **** down our throats?

maby an idea is to have target painter cancel out a TD on missiles like eccm counter on ecm.. that way sum mini ships with target painter bonus wil be a valid option again. remember when fitting a td we using a mid slot so why not counter it with another midslot

So you want us to not nerf the drake and the tengu because the nighthawk is ****? How about we nerf the drake and the tengu and then wait for the dev blog about command ships before we start making hasty comments.

If you could expand on the reasons for these changes in more details (graph of damage vs range for the long range cruiser weapons, etc.) I think a lot of the complaints would go away and you might get some more constructive feedback.

I assume you're talking about the Arty Loki and Arty Sleip? Those... are not really common fits. Even still, they're kinda underwhelming. The Muninn would matter except for the whole LRHACs not mattering at all. The Absolution and Legion both need some buffing.

And the HAM NH is actually getting a pretty massive buff. And the HML NH is getting a relative boost next to the Tengu, which I personally find to be a good thing.

-Liang

I'm puzzled to the fact you class this as hasty? The fact is the Nighthawk "now" is underpowered and this makes it even worse so it cant be hasty can it?

http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/1209/lrc.gif

Four pages back. Reading the thread tends to help your argument a bit.



They'll have more spare powergrid! To the ragemobile!

But is that really any good, so to get any decent dps out of the nighthawk you have to fit it with HAMS and thats ok as long as you want to shoot anything within 6 inches.

It's not as great as it once was, but it is good. And it would be near it's old power, if the TD changes come through.. was thinking the same.

How far do you think HAMs are going to go with Javs and TEs?

-Liang