These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

DNS Black for CSM8

Author
Kalissis
#81 - 2012-12-01 08:40:08 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
Konrad Kane wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:

[...] DNS Black and his alliance stand to gain from removal of Titan Bridges.


How?






Because when they are doing their Black Ops Hot Drops they insure that no one will counter drop them with a Titan Bridge?


As if that happened ever!? (and with success)
I'm sure there are quite some idiots who are willing to drop on a small black ops gang, but the problem here is that the small gang will be cloaked up and gone before they can load the grid. So I bet DNS Black is not worried about counter drops at all, he is more worried about Eve as a whole.
Kalissis
#82 - 2012-12-01 08:43:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalissis
vladhammerfall wrote:
Kalissis wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:

4) Combine with article points (1 cyno per grid, 1 bridge per cyno)


What article are you talking about? DNS BLACK did not write any of this.
Back to the matter at hand, you can't make a tumor better by not removing it. Just remove the whole damn thing and be done with one of the many bad decisions ever made by CCP.


Uh, FYI . Black did write it . In fact he presented it to the Corps for help editing it. He may act like a hobbit, but he has his mind in what is best for EVE.



You misunderstood, I'm talking about the article he mentions and that there is no content of what this other guy is saying. I'm sure DNS Black did write (more or less) whats in HIS article.
Kalissis
#83 - 2012-12-01 08:46:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalissis
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
The Mittani for CSM 2013!


Does he still have a subscription to Eve?


All the moon-goo iskies are going towars paying his 3000 Accounts, so he does! But back on topic +1 for DNS Black for this post.
Aineko Macx
#84 - 2012-12-01 09:43:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Aineko Macx
Mallak Azaria wrote:
The Mittani for CSM 2013!

You seem to have forgotten how, after getting himself removed from the CSM, he publicly stated that his role as Goon leader conflicts with the role as CSM to the point where he felt they were both mutually exclusive.
YuuKnow
The Scope
#85 - 2012-12-01 12:03:21 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Lolar55 wrote:
Just make the titans require crapload of fuel to bridge any ship there goes all that moon goo income.If you wanna bridge a fleet.Great isk sink if not anything elseOops


What are you saying? You only want Titan Bridging to be at all affordable to the CFC and PL?


That's exactly what he's saying. Another stupid argument, making the super rich alliances the only ones that would be using (affording) the jump bridges.
Keen Fallsword
Skyway Patrol
#86 - 2012-12-01 12:53:12 UTC
Do you know guys that we wont receive any respond from CCP or even CSM ? and thread will be locked soon ?
Just sayin.... Blink
Mithrantir Ob'lontra
Ixion Defence Systems
#87 - 2012-12-01 13:27:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Mithrantir Ob'lontra
RAGE QU1T wrote:
Letter to CSM


Everything in this article is spot on with the current state of PvP in 0.0,, moon goo andd such. I think there is hope for bittered vets out there. Nerf the titan bridge, make EVE pvp back to what was , allow supers to dock so there supcepable to station lock outs and corp theivery. what say the 0.0 vets....and the CSM


Yeah right it's spot on regarding the PvP aspect of the game. Roll


I made an honest effort to read the whole THE BLOB argument, but then I lost interest about two sentences down the road reading the same old meme of the glorious old days.

Well guess what.
EVEN in the old days there was THE BLOB monster around, because when one side could only field 30 pilots or so and the other could field 100 or so, the analogies were exactly the same as now.

Also a vital factor of the BLOB as the writer so conveniently disregards is the fact that EVE is a MMO game. The more people logging in (in '06 the peak was 20k people and we were wondering if the servers going to handle the load, now you get around 40k almost every day), the more people will be found that are willing to work as a team to achieve a goal.

What should it happen? Should the bittervets (like me or anyone else) deny the opportunity to the new player to come along in a fleet fight and try to have some fun?

Is this really the way some people think EVE online? That they would be able to dictate their preferences as a minority over the majority of the players?

I agree on the moon goo issue, but come on stop beating the dead horse as far as fleet fights (oh and titans and their ability to bridge) goes.

First of all titans can bridge as far as they can jump themselves. And that is not that far (well it's about the half distance a carrier can). In order to move all the pilots in a fleet to a system across the EVE universe it takes an enormous amount of logistical preparation. Even then during the move, the effort that that is being put forth by the unseen workers (who do most of the hard work so that their alliance mates can do their stuff) of logistics as well as the FC and his people is huge.


All this whining about the BLOB will never cease no matter what. Even if CCP cuts the fleets in half or whatever there will always be a way around so that an alliance will manage to bring as many people as possible in a fight.
Why?
Because that is one way for the alliance to keep it's members happy. PvP is the predominant reason of people for playing this game and denying them to do so, because someone thinks it's unfair that his alliance can't field the number of pvp-hungry people another alliance does, is what will kill this game.

You don't like to blob? Then there is a multitude of choices you can make that eliminate that playstyle from your current abilities.
Life (and EVE) is a game of compromises. You can get what you want once you decide that you have to sacrifice something.
Get your priorities straight and do the choices that support your priorities.
Stop whining like a spoiled child that wants everything handed to a plate.
Morlais Krull
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2012-12-01 14:29:47 UTC
Sorry but i agree with Black 100% -- I have recruited some people to come to eve and stated it was the best PVP game ever -- Now there are no fights for the casual player to be found so we ran around looking for a fight for days --- didnt find much of anything. THose guys quit and moved on to games like Guild Wars 2. The small gang warfare in EVE is dead -- Titans, high sec Incursions ruined the game and without new money (new customers) the game will die. Money is so easy to come by for most i would imagine a lot of characters are playing for free (PLEX). Eve was awesome 4 years ago.... now its just another numbers game. Please bring back EVE or you will lose me and my 3 PAYING accounts.
Utaldail Krull
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2012-12-01 14:33:44 UTC
Above post was meant for this account


-- response to TEST --
OF course you guys like Titan bridges -- because you are incaple of fielding anything successful involving strategy.


We could care less if all bridges were taken out of the game. This is about the state of eve -- not our Black Ops agenda.
Kalissis
#90 - 2012-12-01 15:29:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kalissis
Mithrantir Ob'lontra wrote:
RAGE QU1T wrote:
Letter to CSM


Everything in this article is spot on with the current state of PvP in 0.0,, moon goo andd such. I think there is hope for bittered vets out there. Nerf the titan bridge, make EVE pvp back to what was , allow supers to dock so there supcepable to station lock outs and corp theivery. what say the 0.0 vets....and the CSM


Yeah right it's spot on regarding the PvP aspect of the game. Roll


I made an honest effort to read the whole THE BLOB argument, but then I lost interest about two sentences down the road reading the same old meme of the glorious old days.

Well guess what.
EVEN in the old days there was THE BLOB monster around, because when one side could only field 30 pilots or so and the other could field 100 or so, the analogies were exactly the same as now.

Also a vital factor of the BLOB as the writer so conveniently disregards is the fact that EVE is a MMO game. The more people logging in (in '06 the peak was 20k people and we were wondering if the servers going to handle the load, now you get around 40k almost every day), the more people will be found that are willing to work as a team to achieve a goal.

What should it happen? Should the bittervets (like me or anyone else) deny the opportunity to the new player to come along in a fleet fight and try to have some fun?

Is this really the way some people think EVE online? That they would be able to dictate their preferences as a minority over the majority of the players?

I agree on the moon goo issue, but come on stop beating the dead horse as far as fleet fights (oh and titans and their ability to bridge) goes.

First of all titans can bridge as far as they can jump themselves. And that is not that far (well it's about the half distance a carrier can). In order to move all the pilots in a fleet to a system across the EVE universe it takes an enormous amount of logistical preparation. Even then during the move, the effort that that is being put forth by the unseen workers (who do most of the hard work so that their alliance mates can do their stuff) of logistics as well as the FC and his people is huge.


All this whining about the BLOB will never cease no matter what. Even if CCP cuts the fleets in half or whatever there will always be a way around so that an alliance will manage to bring as many people as possible in a fight.
Why?
Because that is one way for the alliance to keep it's members happy. PvP is the predominant reason of people for playing this game and denying them to do so, because someone thinks it's unfair that his alliance can't field the number of pvp-hungry people another alliance does, is what will kill this game.

You don't like to blob? Then there is a multitude of choices you can make that eliminate that playstyle from your current abilities.
Life (and EVE) is a game of compromises. You can get what you want once you decide that you have to sacrifice something.
Get your priorities straight and do the choices that support your priorities.
Stop whining like a spoiled child that wants everything handed to a plate.


TL;DR; you should read a topics content next time before posting about your personal bias. No one want someone commenting on complex issues and its impact if he can't even read a whole page.

+1 DNS Black for CSM 8
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-12-01 15:34:09 UTC
The best part is how he says we should stop talking about tech, even though they sperged on the forums along with goons nonstop till they gained control of all/most of it. Now for some reason moon goo is 'balanced'..... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Utaldail Krull
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#92 - 2012-12-01 17:05:34 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:
Konrad Kane wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
Konrad Kane wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:

[...] DNS Black and his alliance stand to gain from removal of Titan Bridges.


How?






Because when they are doing their Black Ops Hot Drops they insure that no one will counter drop them with a Titan Bridge?


lol - so you believe that he's written that to stop being counter dropped?

Okay, glad we cleared that up.

Thanks



There might be a ton of reasons for him to write that up, however all I am saying is that he is a bad choice for CSM candidate for multiple reasons:

-First, he ignored or is not aware of the CCP changes that are coming to Moon Goo.
-Second, his allaiance MO is designed in such a way that they do not used gates. Kinda hypocritical to write an Open Letter about gate fights while ignoring the same gates yourself, eh?
-Third, he is proposing a nerf that really will not help the null sec. I mean the problem is clearly force projection and not hundreds upon hundreds of empty or under utilized systems. Clearly.
-Fourth, as indicated by other member of his alliance in this very thread. Their way of gameplay stands to benefit if someone else's way of gameplay is diminished.

My alliance stands to benefit the most from Titan Bridge removal, we control 45 Etana BPCs and if the Titan Bridging is gone it will be the ONLY logistic ship capable of being bridged. However, you do not see me advocating this idea. Removing something from the game is never a solution, re-balancing or using alternative mechanics is always better. crying about it while doing something similar only on a smaller scale is what DNS Black is all about. He wants to nerf Titan Bridging but his alliance is nothing without Black Ops bridging.





you sir have no idea what this letter was all about. we do not care -- if that was the alternative to remove both titan and blops bridges i assure Black is all for it. Ohh wait maybe you are right , in my 6 years playing EvE the only other ship I can fly other than a bomber is a rifter... dang it --- you win
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#93 - 2012-12-01 17:20:45 UTC
Relevant.

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin

Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#94 - 2012-12-01 22:14:28 UTC
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
Relevant.

Nope.
Red Teufel
Calamitous-Intent
#95 - 2012-12-01 22:54:43 UTC
Maybe i should run for CSM if people think this guy deserves to. ccp is on the right track for now but needs to dedicate more resources to making eve better. then the other matter of balancing the risk v rewards in game which is completely off at the most basic levels. then the need for more targets, more rewards for people who use out of station services, and give highsec wardecs resources to war over. All i want for Christmas is more people and their stuff to shoot.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#96 - 2012-12-01 23:11:18 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:

Once again, anyone who burys themselves in 60,000+ blues and then bitches about having to travel far to get a fight is just derp. That being said, there should be far more incentive to have it out with neighbors that are more local than trying to figure out who can set + standings the fastest and brag about who ran the most sanctums that day.

Who knew that the most risk adverse players in the game were these super coalitions in null and not high sec carebears.


This ^ a thousand times this.l Attention

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#97 - 2012-12-02 03:59:53 UTC
Gnaw LF wrote:

-Third, he is proposing a nerf that really will not help the null sec. I mean the problem is clearly force projection and not hundreds upon hundreds of empty or under utilized systems. Clearly.



Because the 100's of empty systems aren't a result of the ability to project power throughout those 100's of systems or anything Roll

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#98 - 2012-12-02 04:08:14 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Lolar55 wrote:
Just make the titans require crapload of fuel to bridge any ship there goes all that moon goo income.If you wanna bridge a fleet.Great isk sink if not anything elseOops


What are you saying? You only want Titan Bridging to be at all affordable to the CFC and PL?



No, titan bridging should be expensive enough that fleets aren't bridged every single time there's an op.

I think the last time I went on a 0.0 sov op and DIDN'T get a titan bridge was... yikes, never. INK got theirs a month or two before they killed FAIL, and I don't recall any sov ops where we didnt get bridged by SOMEONE before that.

It really had made EVE players lazy, and its too cheap for the ammount of force projection it provides.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Easthir Ravin
Easy Co.
#99 - 2012-12-02 05:11:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Easthir Ravin
Greetings

My 2 cents, instead of crapping all over existing game play, which is working as advertised. How about (insert sci-fi story line here) Open new space! What EVE needs is not to force people into play the way the some think might be better. Most arguments made here for Nerfing this or changing that are made by folks who have been negatively affected by it. Not really un-biased.

We need an Oklahoma Land rush!!!!

The New Space would look something like this:

1) The Jove provide new jump bridges that stabilize worm holes and create gate travel in the known Sleeper systems. Opening up 2500 new systems for people to move into.

2) All the game mechanics work in the new space with the current effects of the sleeper systems.

3) SOV works the same way (allowing for minor tweaks in SOV mechanics that fix things that are truly broken and not just people whining)

4) Sleepers are the NPC Ratt's with all the loot and salvage that this entails.

5) Sleepers are not cowed or pirates, they actively hunt you down and they attack SOV structures. Maybe have a situation where-as Sleepers get more active in systems that do not keep the military/ strategic / industries index's up.

6) Sleepers as a faction maybe?

I get it, we all want small gang, but everyone knows that SOV takes large fleets to hold and take. Making it any harder to do this will not fix the game, it just makes the tedium more unbearable.

0.0 was the wild west, and it is now the townsville.


Its a simple thought, but we need a new wild west.

IN THE IMORTAL WORDS OF SOCRATES:  " I drank WHAT?!"

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#100 - 2012-12-02 13:00:25 UTC
Easthir Ravin wrote:
Greetings

My 2 cents, instead of crapping all over existing game play, which is working as advertised. How about (insert sci-fi story line here) Open new space! What EVE needs is not to force people into play the way the some think might be better. Most arguments made here for Nerfing this or changing that are made by folks who have been negatively affected by it. Not really un-biased.

We need an Oklahoma Land rush!!!!

The New Space would look something like this:

1) The Jove provide new jump bridges that stabilize worm holes and create gate travel in the known Sleeper systems. Opening up 2500 new systems for people to move into.

2) All the game mechanics work in the new space with the current effects of the sleeper systems.

3) SOV works the same way (allowing for minor tweaks in SOV mechanics that fix things that are truly broken and not just people whining)

4) Sleepers are the NPC Ratt's with all the loot and salvage that this entails.

5) Sleepers are not cowed or pirates, they actively hunt you down and they attack SOV structures. Maybe have a situation where-as Sleepers get more active in systems that do not keep the military/ strategic / industries index's up.

6) Sleepers as a faction maybe?

I get it, we all want small gang, but everyone knows that SOV takes large fleets to hold and take. Making it any harder to do this will not fix the game, it just makes the tedium more unbearable.

0.0 was the wild west, and it is now the townsville.


Its a simple thought, but we need a new wild west.


So basicly breaking WHs as they exist now?

I'd rather just open up those two regions next to the Jove Empire sov, we guy recently joined our corp after quitting eve 4 years ago and back then there were rumors those were going to be opened up and everyone was getting ready to go "bum rush" those systems.

You want conflict? Open up new space! Sure one side will come out on top, but it will be a hell of a ride.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.