These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

CsMX post about CCP Larkins meeting with WH community. Wow......

First post
Author
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#21 - 2015-06-18 22:54:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Sniper Smith wrote:
First: Fleet Bookmarks.. allow the fleet boss or such to share bookmarks with the fleet, this allowing them to all manually warp to the same spots, without needing extra alts, and nuking the advantage of single corp fleets. Either synced in real time, OR set ahead of time, any "new" locations would not be synced, and you'd need to use the proposed scout tactic. Alternatively, allow BM's to be shared in chat, same way overviews can be, so people can quickly share them with the fleet.

This has some fairly major downsides that makes it problematic. It would add additional near game breaking power to spies. At the moment, spies can share bookmarks, but there is a fair bit of effort required: copy bookmarks, potentially fly to a location with docking rights for both parties, trade or contract the bookmarks. For a trade, obviously the other person needs to be there at the same time and in any case, needs to fly there to pick up the contracted bookmarks. It's possible to do, but is time consuming and not viable on the fly.

The ability for an FC to share bookmarks means a spy could drop fleet and form a fleet instantly with someone else and then trade all relevant bookmarks in real time, without even being present in the same system. It would allow bookmarks to be traded even if they've just been made by one fleet in preparing for a fight.

Even worse if they can be traded in a chat window. You wouldn't even need to risk burning the spy in that case. Just open a private chat and copy bookmarks directly to the opposition.

From my perspective, CCP are putting the cart before the horse on this. I don't personally see the problem with keeping the fleet warp mechanics as they are and would rather they stay the same, but that's from the perspective of a small gang FC who doesn't see at all how this change increases participation of fleet members because it just means a scout needs to stay in position longer so the same fleet warp mechanic can be used. The net effect is to just slow the fleet down and reduce the fun.

However, if it has to be changed, then fix the associated systems first (eg. corp bookmark propagation) before breaking something that works. Don't break more stuff and then work on fixing other things. That's just going to **** people off for little to no real benefit in the end, since the intended outcome won't be what happens.
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#22 - 2015-06-18 23:15:06 UTC
About what I expected:

Everyone is an expert at Eve except the people who make it.

Once a change is implemented, it can NEVER be reversed.

Don't like what a dev suggests, then he should quit the company because he obviously isn't suited for designing my game.

We want change, but we want nice safe change that isn't scary and won't disrupt my style of gameplay.

Obviously an underhanded scheme by CCP to get more money through more alts because god forbid the FC assign someone in fleet to do a job when he can do it himself.

We're playing a computer game but god forbid we actually use the mouse for half of it.

Unless we cater to the lowest common denominator, our entire fleet is gonna fall apart because nobody can do anything for themselves without the FC and anchor leading them by the ****.



I swear, if you guys were the cure for cancer, I would have told the doctor "no thanks, I'll take my chances".
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#23 - 2015-06-18 23:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Jennifer Maxwell wrote:
Obviously an underhanded scheme by CCP to get more money through more alts because god forbid the FC assign someone in fleet to do a job when he can do it himself.

As a small gang FC, that's not the reason I see it will have a different outcome.

In our fleets of 8-15 people, every person is important. We all fly actively and the concept of the F1 monkey doesn't exist.

So assigning one member of the fleet to be the lonewolf warp in point, right at engagement range for an opposition becomes not only a thankless task (they'll be reshipping a lot and potentially finding themselves many jumps away in a new clone), it also changes their entire role in the fleet because they'll also have to be the combat prober for the fleet, in order for them to warp onto a lot of targets in the first place.

As a FC, my role isn't to reduce the fun for my fleet members, nor expose them to a suicide role when that role could easily be taken by a cloaky alt; which then doesn't affect the composition of the fleet in terms of its combat ability.

If someone else wants to perform that role on an alt, no problem. Delegation of roles in fleets often increases fun for everyone. But I'm not going to make someone else perform the role if they don't want to. I'll just take an extra alt myself and continue to try to provide as much fun and content for my fleet as possible.
Richard Bong
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2015-06-18 23:43:13 UTC
"HEY GUYS LETS GET RID OF THE ABILITY TO FLEET WARP TO BOOKMARKS EVEN THOUGH OUR BOOKMARK SYSTEM TAKES 5 MINS+ TO PROPAGATE! "

This change just makes actually playing the game less fun and adds more time with me not doing anything but waiting. Eve isnt instant fun and I am okay with that, but I dont want to now spend more time doing absolutely nothing as I wait 30 seconds for someone to give me a warpin for every connection or whatever so I can then spend 30 seconds warping, which is again me just staring at my screen.


Also the "I want to get rid of orbit and keep at range" is very poorly thought out. You have a game with 1 second server ticks, this isn't a flight sim. My futuristic space ship should be capable of basic maneuvering tasks like "fly in a circle around that thing" or "don't get too close to that guy" without much input from me.

[ASK] Me about drive by thread shitting!

Hicksimus
Torgue
#25 - 2015-06-19 00:27:40 UTC
Meanwhile the player count just keeps falling off a cliff. You can make something challenging without making it a pain in the ass. In this case a fleet warp spool up would be how to change the mechanic....what's being done now is just some altpocalypse pain the the ass.

Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#26 - 2015-06-19 02:16:38 UTC
Removed a troll post.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Cyborg Girl86
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2015-06-19 02:26:50 UTC
Richard Bong wrote:
"HEY GUYS LETS GET RID OF THE ABILITY TO FLEET WARP TO BOOKMARKS EVEN THOUGH OUR BOOKMARK SYSTEM TAKES 5 MINS+ TO PROPAGATE! "

This change just makes actually playing the game less fun and adds more time with me not doing anything but waiting. Eve isnt instant fun and I am okay with that, but I dont want to now spend more time doing absolutely nothing as I wait 30 seconds for someone to give me a warpin for every connection or whatever so I can then spend 30 seconds warping, which is again me just staring at my screen.


Also the "I want to get rid of orbit and keep at range" is very poorly thought out. You have a game with 1 second server ticks, this isn't a flight sim. My futuristic space ship should be capable of basic maneuvering tasks like "fly in a circle around that thing" or "don't get too close to that guy" without much input from me.


^This^

+1 from me
Daemun Khanid
Corbeau de sang
#28 - 2015-06-19 03:03:48 UTC
Getting rid of keep at range and orbit would be the single dumbest move in EvE history. New bros can hardle handle dealing with over view, weapon ranges, point ranges, ew ranges transversals, friendly fleet positions and a single enemy target. Take all that and throw 20 enemy targets in the mix and tell them to fight effectively while zoomed out looking at range rings. Lol give me a break. Valkyre is already DoA and someone thinks they can make eve pilots fly like flight sim pilots... Delusional. You wanna put sim style piloted ships in eve, go for it. You wanna make current ships require manual piloting youre dreaming. Thats not a change of mechanic its a new game. EvE is dead will be reality.

Daemun of Khanid

Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#29 - 2015-06-19 03:39:05 UTC
Don't see it as bad change experts will play advanced game rest of us will play fleet for rookies until we move on F1 ppl will weed them self out and will not be as effective force multipliers as now.

Some ships need to be adjusted and let's give it a go.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard

Hippinse
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2015-06-19 04:14:17 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lol, wow. He was NOT prepared for that interview.

It all keeps coming back to bombers, no matter how much they deny it, huh? I said it in the official thread, and I'll say it here.

If you want to nerf bombers, then nerf bombers, don't screw up a bunch of other things in the process.


I'm leaning towards misdirection. WHs seem to be the real nerf target.
Eli Stan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2015-06-19 04:20:14 UTC
As a small-gang PvP participant, I see this negatively impacting our ability to get fights. We use punting to get on to hostiles. Sometimes its our FC, sometimes it's somebody else in a T3D we put into a squad/wing command position. We can't send just a single covops, SB, T3 or T3D to the combat scan result; they'd surely die, and/or the hostiles would be forwarned enough to move out of tackle range, before the rest of the fleet could land. I guess we could use a cloaky scanner who warps to the scan result at range, then wait ten minutes for it to slowboat to the opposite side of the target so we could warp the fleet to the cloaky at range, twiddling our thumbs, hoping the hostiles don't notice us and dock up.

Of course, the other small gangs we encounter wouldn't be able to use punting against us.

So if the goal is to reduce PvP combat in EVE, I guess this is a good way to go about it. Ugh

(Maybe a tanked-to-the-gills Hecate with a couple scrams could do the trick though, of scanning down and landing in a hostile fleet, and be able to survive long enough to do it again.)
ashley Eoner
#32 - 2015-06-19 04:28:34 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Lol, wow. He was NOT prepared for that interview.

It all keeps coming back to bombers, no matter how much they deny it, huh? I said it in the official thread, and I'll say it here.

If you want to nerf bombers, then nerf bombers, don't screw up a bunch of other things in the process.

They've been screwing things up for a while in an attempt to nerf bombers without actually nerfing them. At some point the collateral damage has to be worse then the results of a bomber nerf.

Wow I didn't realize they wanted to get rid of orbit too. THis game isn't star citizen and it shouldn't be trying to be. I play this game AND star citizen because I like the different playstyles. If eve tries to move towards star citizen then I'm completely moving to star citizen. No sense playing a half ass attempt at the same gameplay...
Starbuck05
Abiding Ormolus
#33 - 2015-06-19 06:12:38 UTC
We are doomed if this keeps up...

Just because i am blond does not make me stoopid !

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#34 - 2015-06-19 07:10:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
This is hardly a surprise, it's not the first time it's been done even for bombers, and it's arguably the fault of all you guys who complained about the bomber nerf last year. To quote me from the ISBoxer thread:
Lucas Kell wrote:
let's face it, this time round it's because bomber fleets are massively overpowered, but when they tried to nerf those the whining began about how it's isboxers fault, not bombers. Now isboxer will still be able to be used for bombers (fleet warp + round robin keybind), and they are *more* overpowered than they were before because they are getting the buff that was to go along with their nerf.


They wanted to nerf bombers, people cried and it got cancelled, so they tried to passively nerf them by attacking how they are controlled. That didn't work so now they are going after the next way the are controlled. Undoubtedly this will hurt other users of fleet warp far more than bombers and bombers will figure out new ways of working (it's a lot easier for them as they have less players and roles to worry about) and we'll be back to having a half-assed change which doesn't fulfill it's goal. And why? Because they are too scared to address the actual problem which is bomber mechanics, because people will be up in arms again over it.

Personally I couldn't care less because I use fleet warp so very little. It's going to be funny watching the fireworks though.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Ima GoodGirl
Aria Shi's Wasted ISK
#35 - 2015-06-19 07:18:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ima GoodGirl
Lucas Kell wrote:
...arguably the fault of all yo guys who complained about the bomber nerf last year.

Who's all yo guys?

CSM? Otherwise, just blowing smoke up your own self importance.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#36 - 2015-06-19 07:45:14 UTC
Ima GoodGirl wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
...arguably the fault of all yo guys who complained about the bomber nerf last year.
Who's all yo guys?

CSM? Otherwise, just blowing smoke up your own self importance.
*You guys. As in the one's that went into enormous threadnaughts over how unfair it was that they dare to reduce the effectiveness of bombers.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Leeluvv
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2015-06-19 08:23:37 UTC
Captain Awkward
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2015-06-19 08:32:27 UTC
1. Makes a thread about intended Fleet warp changes and ask community for feedback.

2. Gets massive consistent negative feedback on how its done with many good proposuals on how to get the intented effekt without screwing up the game.

3. Wants to do the changes anyway.

....

C'mon CCP. You can do better then that.
Cyborg Girl86
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2015-06-19 09:32:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Cyborg Girl86
I seriously hope they don't get rid of orbiting and keep at range. It's how people like me, who use those commands to keep a fleet of alts being controlled by one person, manage to keep their ships in a tightly packed formation.

Controlling multiple ships if these things are removed would be next to impossible. Alts would become more of a hassle then a benefit for solo players trying to control their own personal fleet.
George Gouillot
MASS
Pandemic Horde
#40 - 2015-06-19 09:39:25 UTC
Captain Awkward wrote:
1. Makes a thread about intended Fleet warp changes and ask community for feedback.

2. Gets massive consistent negative feedback on how its done with many good proposuals on how to get the intented effekt without screwing up the game.

3. Wants to do the changes anyway.

....

C'mon CCP. You can do better then that.


I doubt they do
Previous page123Next page