These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Mobile Tractor Unit Quality Of Life Improvement

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#21 - 2014-09-21 06:20:29 UTC
"looks at calendar"
Oh dear, is it that time of the week again?
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#22 - 2014-09-21 13:35:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Donnachadh
Arden Elenduil wrote:
"looks at calendar"
Oh dear, is it that time of the week again?

Wondering if you ever have anything to say that is relevant to the discussion, it seems that this is the only thing I ever see you post.

CCP Fozzie can have his worries about the MTU competing with the Noctis but anyone with half a brain knows that is not ever going to happen, the Noctis simply has to many things working in it's favor. Besides if they are worried about the MTU competing with the Noctis then do a subtle re-balance on both and give the MTU a boost that is based on the Noctis. For those who do not want to use a Noctis they get a vanilla version of the MTU, for those that use it in combination with they get a much more full featured and much more usable tool to add to their salvage work.
Arden Elenduil
Unlimited Bear Works
#23 - 2014-09-21 23:55:46 UTC
And the reason as to why I post it is simple actually. It's because this topic pops up every couple of days while everything about it has already been said and done. It's somewhat turning into an AFK-cloak style of topic almost...

That's why.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#24 - 2014-09-22 14:28:35 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
And the reason as to why I post it is simple actually. It's because this topic pops up every couple of days while everything about it has already been said and done. It's somewhat turning into an AFK-cloak style of topic almost...

That's why.

Then I suggest that you ignore these topics since they appear to bother you so much. Or use the report post option and let ISD deal with them in the proper and official manner.
Feer Truelight
#25 - 2014-09-22 17:51:41 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Came up a few times. use search function.

and no!


Do you read what you post?
I've already stumbled upon this thread. But now tell me how said topic is related to mine?

8/7/2006 3:39:36 PM UTC FreeCCP Promotional Game Time 7 Days Paid

6/1/2012 5:48:57 PM UTC PayPal 1 x 1 Month EVE Subscription + Signup €19.95 Paid

CCP took 6 years to convert me to a (still) paying subscriber :)
Feer Truelight
#26 - 2014-09-22 18:17:39 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Your idea isn't simply a quality of life improvement, but impacts game mechanics and limits risk. Right now, if I am running an anomaly and want to loot everything at the same rate as I kill it, I have to have two MTUs and a pair of salvagers to eliminate wrecks so they don't fight over the same ones. With your idea, I just need the one MTU and I can lose the salvagers. That means I have less assets in space and more fitting flexibility, hence, not mere "quality of life."


Your reasoning is invalid. You can loot the wrecks by yourself while running an anomaly - this will take just a slight increase in multitasking. If you come up with speed tankers I'm preemtively countering it: If you have the speed then it would be high enough to quickly tag every wreck in a reasonable amount of time.

On average you would need the same amount of time if you loot it yourself in comparison to using the MTU.
The difference would be the decrease of multitasking - please be aware that this is no "dumbing eve down".

Therefore increasing QoL.

8/7/2006 3:39:36 PM UTC FreeCCP Promotional Game Time 7 Days Paid

6/1/2012 5:48:57 PM UTC PayPal 1 x 1 Month EVE Subscription + Signup €19.95 Paid

CCP took 6 years to convert me to a (still) paying subscriber :)
Feer Truelight
#27 - 2014-09-22 18:24:23 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
And the reason as to why I post it is simple actually. It's because this topic pops up every couple of days while everything about it has already been said and done. It's somewhat turning into an AFK-cloak style of topic almost...

That's why.


This is not true. Prove me wrong by linking at least 5 "identical" postings.
Please be aware that my post is about priorizing full wrecks over empty wrecks, not any ezMODE change you might saw somewhere else.

About the AFK-cloak style:
My suggestion would work against this style since you are faster with looting - therefore having more time for pewpew.

8/7/2006 3:39:36 PM UTC FreeCCP Promotional Game Time 7 Days Paid

6/1/2012 5:48:57 PM UTC PayPal 1 x 1 Month EVE Subscription + Signup €19.95 Paid

CCP took 6 years to convert me to a (still) paying subscriber :)
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-09-22 18:35:37 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:
Wolf Incaelum wrote:
I think your MTU would need to be within the 2500m distance to be able to tell if a wreck is full or not. Or is it an even 2km? I can't remember, I haven't been in game in a while...

No sir, you can look at your overview and tell if a wreck has loot in it and the distance is only limited by the max range of the overview. For a player to loot the wreck it has to be within 2,500 meters.

Don't care about empty or full first the only thing I would change was to give them a setting to start with closest or farthest away.


My mistake. Like I said, I haven't been in game for a while so I've forgotten little things like that. My bad.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Wolf Incaelum
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#29 - 2014-09-22 18:42:53 UTC
Arden Elenduil wrote:
And the reason as to why I post it is simple actually. It's because this topic pops up every couple of days while everything about it has already been said and done. It's somewhat turning into an AFK-cloak style of topic almost...

That's why.


If you see a thread about a topic that has been popping up a lot and you are tired of being a part of the same discussion over and over again, all I have to say is this: nobody is forcing you to open the thread and read the contents. You're choosing to read the thread of your own free will, which effectively removes any and all bitching rights you may have had about the topic at some point.

ANARCHYFOREVAAARRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!
Feer Truelight
#30 - 2014-09-22 18:47:43 UTC
Wolf Incaelum wrote:
Arden Elenduil wrote:
And the reason as to why I post it is simple actually. It's because this topic pops up every couple of days while everything about it has already been said and done. It's somewhat turning into an AFK-cloak style of topic almost...

That's why.


If you see a thread about a topic that has been popping up a lot and you are tired of being a part of the same discussion over and over again, all I have to say is this: nobody is forcing you to open the thread and read the contents. You're choosing to read the thread of your own free will, which effectively removes any and all bitching rights you may have had about the topic at some point.


Also if a topic is recurring, then it only shows that there is interest in modifying parts of the game.
If you (Arden Elenduil) can't see that, then you should stay away from this subforum.

8/7/2006 3:39:36 PM UTC FreeCCP Promotional Game Time 7 Days Paid

6/1/2012 5:48:57 PM UTC PayPal 1 x 1 Month EVE Subscription + Signup €19.95 Paid

CCP took 6 years to convert me to a (still) paying subscriber :)
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#31 - 2014-09-22 21:03:22 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Feer Truelight wrote:
Also if a topic is recurring, then it only shows that there is interest in modifying parts of the game.
If you (Arden Elenduil) can't see that, then you should stay away from this subforum.
Now now, everybody is free to visit any part of the forum they like and post in any thread they wish as long as they comply to the forum rules.

Also, yes, this topic (including proposals eerily similar to yours)) has been discussed before. And if, as you say, there is interest in the topic of changing the game mechanics in the way you propose, it would be a tremendous help if you and all supporters would stick to one thread.
Not only for us forum moderators, but above and beyond all to further your goal! What do you think catches more attention: a string of short and locked threads on more or less the same topic, or one big thread-nought where the idea and various alternates are discussed at length in a civil manner?


Thread locked.


The Rules:
17. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Previous page12