Player Features and Ideas Discussion

might be because you've already posted, usually when it wipes it if you hit back it will go back to the message you were typing, and you can submit it.

I always now save to clipboard before posting a long response. Too many times the forum goblind have eaten a good retort

wouldn't know, ever since i put a link to "ding dong the witch is dead" when maggie thatcher died, i haven't been allowed a sig.

[quote=CCP Rise]


This is also fairly silly. We constantly make adjustments based on public feedback. Some recent examples might include most of the deployables and all of the Sisters of EVE ships.

Still weird your changes often give advantages to one side of Eve only. Once your changes are implemented because of one side of Eve it makes CCP biassed in every way.


We aren't acting at all like something changed in Sentry mechanics. We also aren't talking about imbalance at all here. We are talking about how, partly because of changes to Domi and Ishtar, Sentries have become popular, and as a result assist has become popular. We think entire fleets of assisted drones is not good gameplay and so we are making a change to address that. I've already said multiple times that the actual power of sentries or of ships that tend to use them is separate and will be addressed, if needed, in a different way (and already has been somewhat by lowering the Dominix tracking/optimal bonus and by adding scripts to omnis).

You are still not providing a solution as it will still allow for a massive blob of drones, only now we will have more people controlling them. Again, proof of CCp's favoritism of one particular side.


The public feedback that you claim was so obviously telling us something we already knew - that the Dominix would 'break the game' - was actually mostly complaining the Dominix would be useless compared to the Armageddon. We knew the tracking/optimal bonus would be powerful but we also liked the idea of giving Gallente a fleet capable ship that used drones. We did not anticipate the server load issues but even if we had I doubt we would have scrapped the idea of letting drone users have a fleet ship.

So, you messed up on your "balancing" and now you are going to favor the blobbing side? Or as you say, you are nerfing the counter to the blob. Would you care to explain your interest in a certain faction of EVE? Your action still favor the numbers game only.


We always open dialogue with players following CSM discussion which follows internal discussion. If you don't feel the CSM is valuable because of their affiliations or personal preferences then I'm sorry, but we will continue to use them as a resource. They are productive, articulate, calm, and they know a lot about EVE Online.


CSM was crap from the moment it was introduced, it is in no way balanced or good for the game. Clearly Mittens is the proof of that. I think a lot of players know a lot of Eve Online, some are more productive or whatever. of course CSm is calm, you are basically giving them (the biggest blob) what they want. kinda obvious you will not hear their spokesmen in the CSM.

Again CCP, poor communication, random changes that break the game, an unwillingness to roll bad changes back and utterly clear favoritsim of one side in EVE.

Yet again you are pulling the card of: "bring the biggest number and you win". Patch after patch you have been reducing weapons and tactics that can counter the blob. So again, what are your "personal" interest in favoring one side?

time for some realtalk here

what a lot of the whining and the fair and balanced GBS LOGISTICS AND FIVES SUPPORTS [MY 5S] counterpoints are debating is yet another blow against capital ship hegemony

people that are not us (read: the wrong people) wish for their latest version of capital ship force multiplying to have unrestricted ability to murder people in subcaps because they take more SP or something

however, attempting to prop up this behavior is like trying to swim upstream -- it is ignoring years of game balance changes to the contrary

after ccp has nerfed remote AOE doomsdays, AOE doomsdays, targeted subcap doomsdays, lowered supercapital EHP, kneecapped supercarrier drone bays, kneecapped titan tracking by adding hard damage reduction against smaller signature resolution in a way that completely ignores tracking, removed the ability for supercapitals to catch remote tracking links and remote sensor boosters, reduced archon/chimera/wyvern/aeon resistance hull bonuses, and now nerfing drone assist in a way that disproportionately affects capitals

a pattern emerges -- it's almost like CCP is trying to make it more difficult for capitals to be used as a force multiplier

it's not so much that we are influencing these decisions somehow by the dint of our existence or some sort of weird corporate back-channel, it's that we are able to take the long view on eve and, quelle surprise, we keep on being right

incursion runners weren't butthurt. they were confused by the contradiction in the first post that has since been cleared up.

what like removing carrier dronebay, and having abandoned drones explode very quickly in lag battles?

after taking a look at your character portrait, i have decided that i can't take you seriously.

Greetings

After nearly 1120 Posts it is amazing the topic is still going on. I just ask everyone to continue the excellent effort to stay on topic and keep the personal attacks and rhetoric to zero. Keep the ideas and discourse flowing.

On On

there are hundreds of nullblobbers you need to ban