These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Summit Day 2 Quick Report

First post
Author
Krios Ahzek
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#21 - 2011-12-09 20:54:07 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:


FAI, NPC uber-fleets wreaking havoc on player-owned assets, depending on how big is the owner corporation/alliance as measured by sovereignty, member count, blued players, and so. And I mean wreak havoc, drop whatever it takes to annihilate a structure within minutes and do so without warning. Preferably when most of the alliance is asleep. Also, NPC won't drop anything but garbage when blown out. Let the universe predate on the bigger fishes for a change...

Or, FAI 2, something I already suggested in the past, a stacking penalty for fleets based on both raw and differential EHP & DPS, dynamically adapting, and fit with various safeguards to prevent cheating the system with partial drops, retreats and reinforcements.

Being big should have shortcomings and handicaps, being small shud allow escape, evasion and surgical capability. Being big is a win-win because CCP wanted to brag about thousands of ships in a battle, but they're killing the game to themselves and everyone...



1.Spend hours setting up a POS and shipping stuff.
NPC supercap fleet hotdrops and alpha strikes it in a cycle.
Get 2000 friends together, beat it back.
No salvage or drops.

Yeah, perfect idea.

2. My fleet is big so our armor magically gros thinner and our guns shoot wet tissue instead of tungsten rounds. People just wouldn't form fleets.


This is beyond dumb, I hope you're trolling.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#22 - 2011-12-09 20:56:40 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Yeah pretty much what I expected.


Malcanis the clairvoyant. Roll

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Krios Ahzek
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2011-12-09 21:04:11 UTC
Came in expecting dumb ideas, left content

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#24 - 2011-12-09 21:05:36 UTC
Krios Ahzek wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:


FAI, NPC uber-fleets wreaking havoc on player-owned assets, depending on how big is the owner corporation/alliance as measured by sovereignty, member count, blued players, and so. And I mean wreak havoc, drop whatever it takes to annihilate a structure within minutes and do so without warning. Preferably when most of the alliance is asleep. Also, NPC won't drop anything but garbage when blown out. Let the universe predate on the bigger fishes for a change...

Or, FAI 2, something I already suggested in the past, a stacking penalty for fleets based on both raw and differential EHP & DPS, dynamically adapting, and fit with various safeguards to prevent cheating the system with partial drops, retreats and reinforcements.

Being big should have shortcomings and handicaps, being small shud allow escape, evasion and surgical capability. Being big is a win-win because CCP wanted to brag about thousands of ships in a battle, but they're killing the game to themselves and everyone...



1.Spend hours setting up a POS and shipping stuff.
NPC supercap fleet hotdrops and alpha strikes it in a cycle.
Get 2000 friends together, beat it back.
No salvage or drops.

Yeah, perfect idea.


Stay little. Let the Big Man look for a bigger one to crush.

Quote:
2. My fleet is big so our armor magically gros thinner and our guns shoot wet tissue instead of tungsten rounds. People just wouldn't form fleets.


This is beyond dumb, I hope you're trolling.



No. Your LOS is blocked by your own ships, spreading your fleet opens gaps, wider formations take longer to assemble and maneuver, supply lines become critical, the more field you control the thinner are your resources in any certain point... those are Real World drawbacks to being big which EVE simply ignores by making ships that magically hit each other no matter what's in between nor where in 360º it's located, that don't need refueling, that can instantly jump where they want, and so and so.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Pavel Bidermann
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2011-12-09 21:20:42 UTC
I would love LOS issues in game. Frigate PVP in an asteroid belt would be awesome! Also, ship explosions as an area effect plus electronic interferance from large numbers or electronically intensive ships being bunched (slower targeting and such).
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-12-09 21:30:48 UTC
I've an idea: remove SOV mechanics. Let people own what they can actively defend on a day to day basis.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#27 - 2011-12-09 21:45:29 UTC
Pavel Bidermann wrote:
I would love LOS issues in game. Frigate PVP in an asteroid belt would be awesome! Also, ship explosions as an area effect plus electronic interferance from large numbers or electronically intensive ships being bunched (slower targeting and such).


That can't be implemented in EVE, it would make the hamsters explode, same as implementing actual trajectory anlaysis to determine hit/miss.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Krios Ahzek
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2011-12-09 21:58:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Krios Ahzek
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:


FAI, NPC uber-fleets wreaking havoc on player-owned assets, depending on how big is the owner corporation/alliance as measured by sovereignty, member count, blued players, and so. And I mean wreak havoc, drop whatever it takes to annihilate a structure within minutes and do so without warning. Preferably when most of the alliance is asleep. Also, NPC won't drop anything but garbage when blown out. Let the universe predate on the bigger fishes for a change...

Or, FAI 2, something I already suggested in the past, a stacking penalty for fleets based on both raw and differential EHP & DPS, dynamically adapting, and fit with various safeguards to prevent cheating the system with partial drops, retreats and reinforcements.

Being big should have shortcomings and handicaps, being small shud allow escape, evasion and surgical capability. Being big is a win-win because CCP wanted to brag about thousands of ships in a battle, but they're killing the game to themselves and everyone...



1.Spend hours setting up a POS and shipping stuff.
NPC supercap fleet hotdrops and alpha strikes it in a cycle.
Get 2000 friends together, beat it back.
No salvage or drops.

Yeah, perfect idea.


Stay little. Let the Big Man look for a bigger one to crush.

Quote:
2. My fleet is big so our armor magically gros thinner and our guns shoot wet tissue instead of tungsten rounds. People just wouldn't form fleets.


This is beyond dumb, I hope you're trolling.



No. Your LOS is blocked by your own ships, spreading your fleet opens gaps, wider formations take longer to assemble and maneuver, supply lines become critical, the more field you control the thinner are your resources in any certain point... those are Real World drawbacks to being big which EVE simply ignores by making ships that magically hit each other no matter what's in between nor where in 360º it's located, that don't need refueling, that can instantly jump where they want, and so and so.


I joined EVE because of the possibility of having huge 500 vs 500 no holds barred PVP battles, something which little/none others MMO can do. Why do you want EVE to be full of 20 vs 20 fights again?

If you're going to nerf blobs, at least go for true line of sight. Random abstract stacking nerfs are just horrible.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

Trelo Aumer
Doomheim
#29 - 2011-12-10 18:14:50 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Crimewatch: Greyscale presented a proposal for rewriting Crimewatch, the system that handles aggression, criminal flags, and so on. It's basically a big ball of tangled code, and CCP wants to streamline and move the various functions into independent units of code. We really liked the new concept.

Is this a purely technical proposal aimed at making the system easier to maintain/adjust and increasing its performance, or were there any proposed changes to the game mechanics this code handles?
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2011-12-11 10:12:43 UTC
Trelo Aumer wrote:
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
Crimewatch: Greyscale presented a proposal for rewriting Crimewatch, the system that handles aggression, criminal flags, and so on. It's basically a big ball of tangled code, and CCP wants to streamline and move the various functions into independent units of code. We really liked the new concept.

Is this a purely technical proposal aimed at making the system easier to maintain/adjust and increasing its performance, or were there any proposed changes to the game mechanics this code handles?

Mostly the former, but some of the latter. Nothing set in stone though.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery

Tore Vest
#31 - 2011-12-11 12:07:57 UTC
continued evolution of supercaps.......
Next step : Remove them ? Bear

No troll.

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#32 - 2011-12-11 17:06:52 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
I've an idea: remove SOV mechanics. Let people own what they can actively defend on a day to day basis.


Well how are people going to safely grind ISK then?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2011-12-12 01:12:34 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
I've an idea: remove SOV mechanics. Let people own what they can actively defend on a day to day basis.


Well how are people going to safely bot ISK then?



^^I know, right (and, fixed)?

Gotta keep what someone called the "Wall of Carebear" out in null inviolable...Ugh

Ni.

Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#34 - 2011-12-12 02:45:45 UTC
The fact about small alliances is that most of them aren't actually competant enough and/or have the patience to hold 0.0 space.
A lot also don't have the courage to seize space. You need drive to succeed.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2011-12-12 12:34:11 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
I've an idea: remove SOV mechanics. Let people own what they can actively defend on a day to day basis.


Well how are people going to safely grind ISK then?

I fail to see the problem. Us having SOV doesn't stop other people from roaming through deklein, it just makes it a ******* ***** to try to take the systems from us. vOv

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2011-12-12 13:43:57 UTC
I too wish for the return to the days of daily fleets to retake all my stations. I love structure grinds they are my favorite thing.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#37 - 2011-12-19 16:49:58 UTC
Trebor

Thanks for the update. Are we going to get any more in depth information soon? I'm mainly interested in faction war. Did they at least indicate what they think the problem with plexing is?

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2011-12-20 13:06:27 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Trebor

Thanks for the update. Are we going to get any more in depth information soon? I'm mainly interested in faction war. Did they at least indicate what they think the problem with plexing is?

We are working on the minutes which will have some more details.
R

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery

Previous page12