Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Would it be possible to multi-fit without bogging the servers? As in, could a Doctrine fitting be applied to multiple ships at one time, specifically without having to board each one individually?

Can we get a "Rename All" button?

Are there plans on releasing Fireworks/Snowball/Festival Launcher BP's, or at least seeding the market regularly?

#1

Low end DED sites (1/10 and 2/10) often require keys that are missing making the site un-playable.
I believe this is a left over from when DED sites were static.
They create a situation where the site can remain for days and not be able to be run or respawn elsewhere.
This can be an issue for newer players as these are the easiest DED sites and can spawn in starter systems.

Here is a list of the sites I have seen this happen with:
Minmatar Contracted Bio-Farm (One locked gate. Angel 1/10)
Angel Creo-Corp Mining (Two locked gates. Angel 2/10)
Pith Robux Asteroid Mining & Co. (Two locked gates. Guristas 1/10)
Pith Merchant Depot (One locked gate. Guristas 2/10)
Sansha Military Outpost (One locked gate. Sansha 1/10)
Serpentis Drug Outlet (One locked gate. Serpentis 1/10)

Other DED sites in the past required keys but the gates were unlocked in them. I think the same should apply to these.

#2
The drone sites Haunted Yard and Chemical Yard do not allow T2 crusiers but the Desolate Site does. I think this should be changed.

#3
You cannot bring a prospect into any Lookout signature but you can enter with Exhumers. I believe this was an oversite.

Thanks.

Second the motion. I await the cries of "dumbing down", but really, the critical bit is pointing your eyes at D-scan, not pressing the button once you've done so...

Couple things on there that don't really strike me as 'major' but all in all, great list.



+1

http://i.imgur.com/1lLEBJU.png?1
Is someone listening to our requests?

I presented a total of 55 items from this thread to CCP. Not all of them were possible, and some of the answers I can't talk about, but hey. It's something.

Hi, Jayne

May I, please, ask you two questions:

First: why to eliminate learning impants and remaps. I understand CCP also wants to get rid of them, but why? What benefits does this bring? The only reason I see is that some newbies stupidly waste all their bonus remaps and start bombarding CCP with petitions. Free jump clones allow to have expensive implants to speed up training and cheaper ones to fly dangerous. Also, high grades sets are expensive and nefring them shall affect many players. Implants are still a noticeable part of game economy.
TL;DR: removing leaning implants takes away the players ability to affect their learning speed, what does this grants in return of lost freedom to choose for ourselves?

Second: why to require approval for the watchlist? If implemented it shall benefit bigger corporations wardeccing smaller and one-man corps for jucy kills. Bigger entites already have a huge advantage in numbers, intel and firepower, so this simply benefits highsec griefers and thus, providing more pressure on solo players.
TL;DR: solo players are already oppressed enough, what for you want to make their gameplay even harder?

Thanks

That would be quite a boost to afk auto-pilot.

Isn't it? I thought the current trend was to reward active gameplay, like the aborted fleet warp changes? Why should changes be made to reward players for not actually interacting with their game client or remove incentives to pay attention to what is happening around them?

Shouldn't the game scale such that those that actively play and micromanage their ship receive increased performance, as compared to someone who say uses the auto-pilot, or just assigns drones and is fleet warped around?

Well, enforcing mutual approval of watchlists shall just eliminate their usage in cases of wardecs (also it will cause a problem when kicked out corp members could still have this kind of intel for former corp members, like non-expiring skype or icq authorization). If this (approval) happen, smaller enties really need some countermeasures. I'd say adding NPC stations to most of nullsec regions sounds fine for me. When wardecced in a one-man corp flying to Provi is a good soultion, because highsec griefers would hardly chase you in their DPS ships there thru the bubbles. Most of nullesc is NBSI, the guarded "private property" with no ability for a random visitor/exploprer to dock. There is the discussion here at FANDI about adding more NPC stations to null. You know what? This hardly can happen. The lobby of megacorps already influenced nullsec wormhole connections to make WH null-to-null travels very problematic, the jump fatigue also defends the idea to prevent massive intrusions.
I'd still suggest adding more NPC stations to different regions of nullsec, as this will cause the outrage of big alliances. Imagine all of a sudden a huge fleet undocks. Why the heck everything in this game design varies to please big instances? In my opinion a sandbox is not to distribute more sand to bigger kids.

TL;DR: solo gameplay is still an option. CCP & CSM efforts to eliminate it by removing features for smaller corps and granting nothing in return are sad.