Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So, so ignore the disorganized feedback, and instead pay attention to the pages of well thought replies, pages of math and the opinions of the most prominent small gang fcs in the game.

And maybe put changes on sisi instead of deploying right to tq.

Edit: And if you have had this plan and been testing for a while, this thread should have been made weeks ago, and this should have been on sisi with the initial sisi rubicon deployment.

Interesting enough if you make ammo switch 10 seconds. What going to stop me from fireing till I have one charge left then switching ammo then switching back?

As that would only take 20 seconds over the 40 you suggest.

Why not just cut the crap and balance for 20 second reload?

In all these threads the people that are unhappy post most and when CCP has listened to people whining (cf maurader thread) it turned out what all the people had been yelling for was much much worse than the reasonable ideas that CCP had in the first place and so they changed it back. Not only are they professional devs but they also have a lot of access to data on how fights are being won/lost. If you got everyone in this thread who proclaimed to be elite PVP and asked them to show a fit for ship XYZ and then comment on each others fit then the shouting and calling of bad would be even louder.
Turns out 90% of the people that post in these threads rate their ability far higher than they should .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect this explains why
CCP are thus not listening to numbers on each side but weighting for whether the people posting actually have a clue.

It will also be very 1 dimensional and predictable, therefore extremely easy to kill. It won't be able to poke for fear of the reload timer. And HML and HAM fits will still have horrid damage application
and a gimped tank.

First of all the CSM has 1 small gang PvP'er whom to my knowledge doesn't solo and does not fly in lowsec much, so how exactly they are a good group to give representative feedback on the change in that regard eludes me.

Some of the negativity in this thread comes from frustration, you tell us things 'like HM's get used' but is that HM's get used in small gang or does that number include 0.0 caracal fleets? Are the people fitting these able to fit both RLML's T2 and HM T2 (do they have choice)? We can't see the data you're using so if our experience is different from what you calim we'll be naturally inclined to mistrust said data.
Then people like me have asked you several times why you're only touching rapid launchers? Talwars (and Condors and Breachers) with light missiles are also very popular yet these don't need balancing? A strait forward answer as to why that is would provide us some critical insight into your thought process here.
Also why does this apparently have to be in Rubicon 1.0, what is the reasoning behind not giving us time with it on SiSi and waiting for 1.1 before you release them into the game? Who knows people like me and Michael might even come around if it turns out were wrong after all.

And even if the RLML change works out the way you hope it will, despite many of us thinking it won't. RHML's will be a no go on any non-fleet battleships from day one, while a caracal might be able to run a battleship unable to fire for 40 seconds is a tackled and dead battleship. Why pick them ever over precision cruises at that point?

First of all. There are no "renowned Genos pilots" in this thread at all. There were only 6 Genos pilots off the top of my head that were REALLY GOOD pilots and or THEORY CRAFTERS/INNOVATORS. The rest could be broken down into 2 - 3 that were recruited and really good at an early age ingame (Leeloo comes to mind); another 4 - 5 REALLY GOOD pilots whom already made names for themselves and joined as such (Proz comes to mind). The rest were just rabble and coat tail riding (ok to good pilots). Like most OK or bad pilots who join "ELEET" corporations or alliances they were considered "really good" by outsiders by proximity. Still, Genos was one of the largest concentration of solo pilots in game. Now, most of their really good pilots are inactive or log in from time to time to **** about. With that said, they did not have a monopoly on the REALLY good pilots or just good ones ingame. There are a lot more of them outside of that corporation but many of those interact or have interacted with the Genos.

As for Kill2? His major contribution to EVE Online was his earlier PVP videos and to an ideology that was starting to formulate since I started playing (late 2007 - early 2008). He created or was a major factor in popularizing the term "small gang". Something I'm not even sure I know the meaning of anymore. I'm told 20 pilot fleets are small gang. While I thought 2 - 4 was small gang v0v

Anyways.

Kill2 was not to my mind or from anyone I considered REALLY GOOD a GREAT PILOT, just one of many ok or good ones. He stood out because he made PVP videos. Later, he started doing the "bringing back solo" stuff with Kovorix whom I knew and started interacted with back when he was in Python Cartel with Spector, Jawmare and Helicity (Krov didn't really start soloing until 2 years later I believe).

So, I suppose he should be thanked for his contributions as a player and a pilot. Personally I was never a fan of his, never watched his streams; did watch his old videos when they came out back in 2008. Still, he was never a knowledge base or innovator to already established solo pilots and I'm not a fan of the ideology he help spread. To me you're either a capable solo pilot or you're not. He brought more inclusion to a small community of solo pilots who flew together from time to time by popularizing the term "small gang" and from that also grew a solo pvper ideology. Which is probably why I avoid joining "ELEET" entities. I preferred the small quiet community who did things, made small videos and were ignored by the majority of players.

i seriously think you need a poll function(for devs only) in the forums which allows you to measure feedback in a objective way then you could easily categorize feedback into groups like:

- i like as is
- i like with changes to balance
- i dont like it at all leave as is

this would avoid lots of problems i think you mistake the concerns of the community because of how its voiced.

for my part i think:
- the idea is interesting
- not acceptable in proposed state
- should not be in rubicon 1.0 but developed further and maybe get into 1.1

ps.: as you mentioned bs you ignored nearly all feedback to the tempest because you were sure it was fine.

Come on CCP Rise - that is just not true. There are several long, well thought out critical feedback posts in this thread that have been posted. And yes, this is short notice, you might have talked about it for weeks internally, but you're basically giving it to the community, just over a week before release, and now digging your heals in over the people disagreeing with the whole idea. No chance to try it on Sisi and no chance for considered discourse. You posted on Twitter saying you wanted feedback. You got it.

I'm sorry if some personal attacks on you have made this seem like its become a you vs. the mob siege mentality you seem to have adopted, although I thought my cat video was funny , this idea is being rammed down our throats, no matter how you slice and dice it, and you have completely ridden roughshod over anyone disagreeing with your idea - this post from you being the latest!

Take a deep breath. Put it on Sisi and push it to 1.1. Let us try the damn idea out. Then offer feedback.

I pay real money for EVE and fly the ships you're intending to change radically, so please don't be to upset, but quite literally you will be taking ISK out my wallet with this change. But if you don't want to change ideas based on our feedback - don't ask for feedback.

How predictable is an arty Tornado? Very.

How effective is it against its chosen targets? Very.

Anything is easy to counter... if you know how and can execute.

What makes a doctrine successful is leveraging your strengths, and not allowing the enemy to capitalize on your weaknesses.

I can think of a dozen different ways to utilize the strengths of the system as it is currently proposed, and I am far from alone in this. While there are several knowledgeable FC's in this thread, there are a LARGE number of other FC's and small gang specialists having completely different conversations outside this thread about this proposed mechanic and how they plan to capitalize on it.

I will agree that the numbers are going to need some fiddling with to get the balance where it needs to be, but the basic mechanic is very sound... and more than a bit clever.

Now that we're getting longer reload timers for more things, can we change the reload indication to a countdown of some sort? When everything was <= 10 seconds it wasn't a big deal, but with ASBs, MJDs (not exactly a reload, but same principle), the potential new launchers... it's hard to "manage" timers when you have no idea where in the timer you are.