These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Drone And UI related suggestions

Author
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2015-10-12 20:01:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
I've been playing around with Drone boats lately, trying to get a feel for likes and dislikes.

I've found some issues I'd like to bring to light.

1) there's no easy way to determine your control range. It requires you to click show info on your ship, after all related modules have been attached, then scroll down until you find control range.
Solution A) when fitting window is open, hovering over drone DPS Icon will show control range.
Solution B) drone control range is listed at the top of the drone control window, when undocked.

2) When looking at drone velocity, optimal, and DPS; it requires you to show info or look at fitting window (in the case of DPS) however, fitting window shows highest potential drone DPS, and not the drones you intend to us.
Solution) when hovering over a drone, in drone control window, it should display this information, just as it does with modules on the hud.

3) it is hard to tell how much damage a drone has taken.
Solution) display % amount remaining instead of the undeterminable water marker they currently are.

4) Deleted this suggestion....

5) When focus fire is UNCHECKED, drones should prioritize independent targets, just as a player would with ungrouped turrets/launchers. However, the player can command the drones to engage the same target by simply giving the command.
This will also optimize salvage drones, which perform better independently.


These are just the things I've come across, so far, in playing with drone boats.
Iain Cariaba
#2 - 2015-10-13 02:24:06 UTC
1. It's actually a rather simple math formula to figure it out, and once you learn it you never need look at an info page again to figure it out.

2. When you pile a bunch of different drones into the drone bay, how is the system supoosed to automatically know which set you intend to use. It cannot, so it defaults to the largest set. If you want to know DPS of smaller drones, take the bigger ones out of the drone bay.

3. True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones.

4. Carry a mobile depot with remote reps in your hold. Refit for reps, repair deployed drone. Drones are pretty low in HP, so only takes one rep to do the job.

5. Remember, drones are dumb on purpose. Smart drones go rogue.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2015-10-13 02:51:39 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
1. It's actually a rather simple math formula to figure it out, and once you learn it you never need look at an info page again to figure it out.

2. When you pile a bunch of different drones into the drone bay, how is the system supoosed to automatically know which set you intend to use. It cannot, so it defaults to the largest set. If you want to know DPS of smaller drones, take the bigger ones out of the drone bay.

3. True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones.

4. Carry a mobile depot with remote reps in your hold. Refit for reps, repair deployed drone. Drones are pretty low in HP, so only takes one rep to do the job.

5. Remember, drones are dumb on purpose. Smart drones go rogue.


Seriously dude?

I get your reply on number 4,'but why in the hell is there any reasoning to stop the rest of the suggestions?
It's not balance related.
It's quality of life and rather simple changes, for the most par.

Seriously.. It's like the forums are just here for people to douche out on others.
Iain Cariaba
#4 - 2015-10-13 02:58:22 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
1. It's actually a rather simple math formula to figure it out, and once you learn it you never need look at an info page again to figure it out.

2. When you pile a bunch of different drones into the drone bay, how is the system supoosed to automatically know which set you intend to use. It cannot, so it defaults to the largest set. If you want to know DPS of smaller drones, take the bigger ones out of the drone bay.

3. True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones.

4. Carry a mobile depot with remote reps in your hold. Refit for reps, repair deployed drone. Drones are pretty low in HP, so only takes one rep to do the job.

5. Remember, drones are dumb on purpose. Smart drones go rogue.


Seriously dude?

I get your reply on number 4,'but why in the hell is there any reasoning to stop the rest of the suggestions?
It's not balance related.
It's quality of life and rather simple changes, for the most par.

Seriously.. It's like the forums are just here for people to douche out on others.

Stop posting bad ideas and I'll stop pointing out thag they're bad ideas. Beyond that, the personal insults are uncalled for.
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#5 - 2015-10-13 03:14:39 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:
1. It's actually a rather simple math formula to figure it out, and once you learn it you never need look at an info page again to figure it out.

2. When you pile a bunch of different drones into the drone bay, how is the system supoosed to automatically know which set you intend to use. It cannot, so it defaults to the largest set. If you want to know DPS of smaller drones, take the bigger ones out of the drone bay.

3. True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones.

4. Carry a mobile depot with remote reps in your hold. Refit for reps, repair deployed drone. Drones are pretty low in HP, so only takes one rep to do the job.

5. Remember, drones are dumb on purpose. Smart drones go rogue.


Seriously dude?

I get your reply on number 4,'but why in the hell is there any reasoning to stop the rest of the suggestions?
It's not balance related.
It's quality of life and rather simple changes, for the most par.

Seriously.. It's like the forums are just here for people to douche out on others.

Stop posting bad ideas and I'll stop pointing out thag they're bad ideas. Beyond that, the personal insults are uncalled for.


Wow...

Iain... dude. This is one of the most extreme examples I've seen in a while of someone DIGGING for negatives to post.

1. Absolutely great idea to show control range in the title bar of the drone window. +1
- "it's a simple formula" really dude? really? unbelievable

2. Another awesome idea, show drone DPS when hovering over a single drone, OR when hovering over a group of drones. Perfect. let's you see any groups DPS, just like turrets.
- "just take them out of the drone bay" seriously Ian? While you're down there looking for things wrong with good ideas, if you find any gold let me know

3. I support the ability to switch between %hull %armor %shield or the current health bars.
- Ian some people, on high resolutions, depending on system background, can't even tell "roughly". this change isn't crucial but is still a good QOL suggestion

4. NO to auto, free repairs.

5. Current random selection is fine.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2015-10-13 03:15:55 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:

Stop posting bad ideas and I'll stop pointing out thag they're bad ideas. Beyond that, the personal insults are uncalled for.


They're not bad ideas.

Well, apart from number 4, which is just a suggestion, and I don't really care about it.

The rest of them are UI suggestions for better quality of life.
What I'm suggesting is no more than the information you can see when you hover your pointer over a module in your hud.
Only, they're applied to drones.

Now, as far as the last part, that is not a personal insult; but rather, an observation of the douche nature of the self proclaimed "elite" that come on the forums bashing ideas and other players, because they can, and because they feel that their failures in life can be taken out on others. You know, keyboard warriors.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2015-10-13 03:22:13 UTC
Leto Aramaus wrote:


5. Current random selection is fine.


This one bothers me the most...
When drones are selected to NOT focus fire, they will still focus fire on the nearest target, in most cases.

This is especially annoying with Salvage drones. They will continuously group up on the same wreck, unless you target and tell each drone to salvage each wreck, individually.
This is extremely tedious.

Imagine if your turrets couldn't be grouped, you had to click the target before engaging each turret, and had to right click each turret and tell it to engage each time..
This is what it's like when trying to engage drones independently on each wreck.

It's a nightmare.
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#8 - 2015-10-13 12:40:11 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Leto Aramaus wrote:


5. Current random selection is fine.


This one bothers me the most...
When drones are selected to NOT focus fire, they will still focus fire on the nearest target, in most cases.

This is especially annoying with Salvage drones. They will continuously group up on the same wreck, unless you target and tell each drone to salvage each wreck, individually.
This is extremely tedious.

Imagine if your turrets couldn't be grouped, you had to click the target before engaging each turret, and had to right click each turret and tell it to engage each time..
This is what it's like when trying to engage drones independently on each wreck.

It's a nightmare.


I'm not sure how you'd like it to work...

With focus fire UNCHECKED and aggressive mode ON? You want salvage drones to just split to 5 different wrecks?

Do salvage drones even work "aggressively"? If you launch them with "Aggressive" ON, do they automatically start salvaging? So they would automatically start salvaging one wreck if focus fire was ON, and all salvage a different wreck if FF is OFF?

Because if you're not referring to aggressive mode, then when you give the command "Engage" to salvage drones, you're giving it for ONE target, so of course they're all going to go there, even if FF is unchecked, you still said "Engage" on one wreck.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#9 - 2015-10-13 13:24:37 UTC
Leto Aramaus wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Leto Aramaus wrote:


5. Current random selection is fine.


This one bothers me the most...
When drones are selected to NOT focus fire, they will still focus fire on the nearest target, in most cases.

This is especially annoying with Salvage drones. They will continuously group up on the same wreck, unless you target and tell each drone to salvage each wreck, individually.
This is extremely tedious.

Imagine if your turrets couldn't be grouped, you had to click the target before engaging each turret, and had to right click each turret and tell it to engage each time..
This is what it's like when trying to engage drones independently on each wreck.

It's a nightmare.


I'm not sure how you'd like it to work...

With focus fire UNCHECKED and aggressive mode ON? You want salvage drones to just split to 5 different wrecks?

Do salvage drones even work "aggressively"? If you launch them with "Aggressive" ON, do they automatically start salvaging? So they would automatically start salvaging one wreck if focus fire was ON, and all salvage a different wreck if FF is OFF?

Because if you're not referring to aggressive mode, then when you give the command "Engage" to salvage drones, you're giving it for ONE target, so of course they're all going to go there, even if FF is unchecked, you still said "Engage" on one wreck.



once they finish that one they were on they will move on to another on there own.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2015-10-13 13:38:47 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Leto Aramaus wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Leto Aramaus wrote:


5. Current random selection is fine.


This one bothers me the most...
When drones are selected to NOT focus fire, they will still focus fire on the nearest target, in most cases.

This is especially annoying with Salvage drones. They will continuously group up on the same wreck, unless you target and tell each drone to salvage each wreck, individually.
This is extremely tedious.

Imagine if your turrets couldn't be grouped, you had to click the target before engaging each turret, and had to right click each turret and tell it to engage each time..
This is what it's like when trying to engage drones independently on each wreck.

It's a nightmare.


I'm not sure how you'd like it to work...

With focus fire UNCHECKED and aggressive mode ON? You want salvage drones to just split to 5 different wrecks?

Do salvage drones even work "aggressively"? If you launch them with "Aggressive" ON, do they automatically start salvaging? So they would automatically start salvaging one wreck if focus fire was ON, and all salvage a different wreck if FF is OFF?

Because if you're not referring to aggressive mode, then when you give the command "Engage" to salvage drones, you're giving it for ONE target, so of course they're all going to go there, even if FF is unchecked, you still said "Engage" on one wreck.



once they finish that one they were on they will move on to another on there own.


Actually, they won't.. At least that's my experience.
In order to get them to aggressively move between targets, you must not have a wreck targeted. Well, at least not selected as primary target anyway.
Once you launch them, just press your engage key and they will start salvaging any wreck within range.
However, if set to not focus fire,'they will still focus fire,'as they all prioritize the closest target.
Raphendyr Nardieu
Avanto
Hole Control
#11 - 2015-10-13 13:46:12 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:

4) Repairing drones is a bit annoying, or requires you to simply pay. Not saying there's a problem with this, but I had a suggestion..


Could we broadcast repair request for drones. It's bit risky to mark them as targets for logis.

Rest of the points seemed quite nice and simple changes :)
Zuteh
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#12 - 2015-10-13 17:21:07 UTC
Totally agree OP, tough I'd prefer they scrap the current drone control scheme all together and make drones on par with turrets and missiles as primary weapon. The current UI might have been OK 5 years ago but is just horribad today
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#13 - 2015-10-13 18:39:08 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Iain Cariaba wrote:

Stop posting bad ideas and I'll stop pointing out thag they're bad ideas. Beyond that, the personal insults are uncalled for.


They're not bad ideas.

Well, apart from number 4, which is just a suggestion, and I don't really care about it.

The rest of them are UI suggestions for better quality of life.
What I'm suggesting is no more than the information you can see when you hover your pointer over a module in your hud.
Only, they're applied to drones.

Now, as far as the last part, that is not a personal insult; but rather, an observation of the douche nature of the self proclaimed "elite" that come on the forums bashing ideas and other players, because they can, and because they feel that their failures in life can be taken out on others. You know, keyboard warriors.


They aren't bad ideas per say, but they all point to you being lazy and wanting everything easy. You just change the word easier to the word better. I don't think easier is better and don't agree with your ideas.

1. range - it's a simple formula. If you can't remember your range and send your drones the game already say NO and then tells you the range. The solutions of remembering the number or reading the message are already easy enough. This does not need improvement.

2. best drones for the job - paper hover dps isn't going to tell you which ones are best. The hover number is pretty meaningless. You have to know which drones to use on which targets (when to drop sentries or lights and so on). Paper dps hover numbers won't help you pick the right ones. The hover number only serves to count coup with your buddies.

3. "True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones." It can't be said better than it has already been said.

5. This truly scares me. What's your next request? FOF turrets that auto sellect the best target? This 'easier' which you call 'better' is a request to dumb the game down just one more notch - one less thing to be bothered with.

Your ideas are about lazy or in the case of #5 a direct assault on the integrity of the game. I recommend you get a piece of paper out and write down the aspects of game play that you do like and (referring to the list from time to time) focus on enjoying those things.

Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#14 - 2015-10-13 19:21:45 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:

1. range - it's a simple formula. If you can't remember your range and send your drones the game already say NO and then tells you the range. The solutions of remembering the number or reading the message are already easy enough. This does not need improvement.

If it's so damn easy, then why is having this information displayed so much of an issue?
You say it's a simple formula, and that the drones already tell you.

So why is it a problem that it shows this information at the top of the drone window?

Quote:
2. best drones for the job - paper hover dps isn't going to tell you which ones are best. The hover number is pretty meaningless. You have to know which drones to use on which targets (when to drop sentries or lights and so on). Paper dps hover numbers won't help you pick the right ones. The hover number only serves to count coup with your buddies.


That's advanced training. Much like knowing the differences between turrets.
All I want to know is paper DPS.
When it comes to sentry drones, this will tell me which are short and which are long range with enough experience.

If this information isn't important to have, then why list out the information for turrets and other modules on the hud?
Quote:

3. "True percentage is really irrelevant here. You know they're damaged, and you can tell roughly how much. This is good enough for drones." It can't be said better than it has already been said.

Percentage is completely relevant when you can't tell if the drone is damage without locking the drone.
I'm a bit OCD and it's important that my drones are at 100%. If a drone is at 95%, it's hard to tell if it's damage on the drone interface window.
Not a big issue, but a quality of life suggestion.

Quote:
5. This truly scares me. What's your next request? FOF turrets that auto sellect the best target? This 'easier' which you call 'better' is a request to dumb the game down just one more notch - one less thing to be bothered with.

Your ideas are about lazy or in the case of #5 a direct assault on the integrity of the game. I recommend you get a piece of paper out and write down the aspects of game play that you do like and (referring to the list from time to time) focus on enjoying those things.


Just because something makes life easier doesn't mean it's dumbing down or laziness.

If this is an issue with you, then perhaps we need to take away other actions in Eve that make life easier so that we can weed out "lazy" people.

What types of things would this be?

The overview - You're being lazy if you want an easy and well organized list of items based on your preferences. You should have to select and lock targets in the game window.

Short-cut buttons - You should have to click all the buttons on the selected item window. No more f1 or control click, or anything else.

Grouping - No more drone groups, weapon stacks, people groups (even based off standing), no bookmark groups.. Nothing

No information on fitting window - You should be forced to click "show info" on your ship to know how much CPU/PG you have remaining, you should have to click "show info" on any turret or module in order to find out any information.

No more hover info - Whether on hud or fitting window, you should have to click "show info" in order to get any information related to modules, including turret range and having to do the math to determine group dps.

No more math done for you - Even bonuses and skills won't display their effect on a module. You will have to gather all the information and figure out how to do all the math yourself.

No agent finder, no people locators, no system info on top left including sec status, must probe down everything in game including stations and gates, no displaying of shield/armor/hull/cap information on your ship or the targeted ship, no distance indicator on target...

Basically, lets make everything extremely difficult because YOU don't agree with making anything else easier.

What I'm getting at here is, you're basically saying no because the word exists.
Read my earlier comments in relation to this.

What is it in Eve that you enjoy doing the most?
Now, lets take away everything that makes that task easier because it has nothing to do with quality of life, convenience, or anything else that makes people continue to want to play Eve and has everything to do with you being Lazy.
Am I right??
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#15 - 2015-10-13 19:44:11 UTC
Your argument kind of sux. I'm not trying to make eve harder, I'm trying to keep lazy people from making it too easy. I'm not asking for changes, so you ranting that I want eve to be more difficult doesn't really make sense. Half your stuff is cosmetic crap that doesn't affect game play. You having OCD doesn't mean the game is better with some new hover feature.

Look pal, you've already taken #4 off the table. The 95% vs 100% OCD needs to go next. Then once you concede #5 we can work on the remaining 3 until you understand that this is all working just fine and we'll all walk away happy with the current game intact.

None of your ideas add any fun to the game. Forget this hoo haw and go think up whacky stuff that makes the game more fun. This is a non winner. Accept it and move along.

The bottom line: Your suggestions don't improve the game in any way.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2015-10-13 20:17:19 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Your argument kind of sux. I'm not trying to make eve harder, I'm trying to keep lazy people from making it too easy. I'm not asking for changes, so you ranting that I want eve to be more difficult doesn't really make sense. Half your stuff is cosmetic crap that doesn't affect game play. You having OCD doesn't mean the game is better with some new hover feature.

Look pal, you've already taken #4 off the table. The 95% vs 100% OCD needs to go next. Then once you concede #5 we can work on the remaining 3 until you understand that this is all working just fine and we'll all walk away happy with the current game intact.

None of your ideas add any fun to the game. Forget this hoo haw and go think up whacky stuff that makes the game more fun. This is a non winner. Accept it and move along.

The bottom line: Your suggestions don't improve the game in any way.


They do improve the game by making it user friendly.
And my argument isn't that you want to make Eve harder, but instead I was stating if you're going to argue that it makes the game too easy, then perhaps we need to revert all the things I suggested, as they all make Eve easier than anything I have suggested here.

As far as my OCD, everyone has their preferences.
Some like to have all their turrets grouped, some prefer 2 groups of 3, 3 groups of 2, some don't groups their turrets.
How is allowing me the ability to display drone HP % any different, and how does it break the game?

You know what; how do any of these suggestions break the game?
3 of 4 make it marginally easier, and the 4th is only a change on an automated system to make it perform better when automated.
It's like using a permanent marker on a dry erase board.. Sure, it works just fine and can be cleaned off, but why would you make something simple so unnecessarily difficult?

Now, as far as your suggestion on none of my ideas adding "fun" to the game.

1) no, they don't. However, they get the tedium out of the way, such as having to math out of show info and having to independently swap between drones and wrecks to get them to salvage separately. This allows you to enjoy other parts of the game as opposed to managing these aspects.

2) if I had come on here suggesting something that does add "fun" to the game, such as a new ship class or module, you'd be in here asking what role, niche, or need it fills that is currently an issue.
So, a player can't come on to the forums and suggest something "fun" because it's not needed.
A player cannot come and suggest something that is needed because it's not "fun" or others state nothing new needs to be added.
Then, you can't suggest quality of life improvements because it makes Eve too easy and is no fun.

What not fun is having to micromanage different aspects that are deemed "easy" and quality of life is thrown out the window.
Iain Cariaba
#17 - 2015-10-14 03:57:59 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
2) if I had come on here suggesting something that does add "fun" to the game, such as a new ship class or module, you'd be in here asking what role, niche, or need it fills that is currently an issue.
So, a player can't come on to the forums and suggest something "fun" because it's not needed.
A player cannot come and suggest something that is needed because it's not "fun" or others state nothing new needs to be added.

Your suggestions here, in fact most of your suggestions to date, are neither needed or add fun. Your suggestions are nothing more than self-serving "I don't like this, so change it" tripe that you feel adding "QoL Improvement" label to makes acceptable. "It's a QoL Improvement" is the second most commonly used excuse for promoting bad ideas, right behind "Think of the newbies" and just in front of "But it's so easy to code."
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#18 - 2015-10-14 04:15:06 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
2) if I had come on here suggesting something that does add "fun" to the game, such as a new ship class or module, you'd be in here asking what role, niche, or need it fills that is currently an issue.
So, a player can't come on to the forums and suggest something "fun" because it's not needed.
A player cannot come and suggest something that is needed because it's not "fun" or others state nothing new needs to be added.

Your suggestions here, in fact most of your suggestions to date, are neither needed or add fun. Your suggestions are nothing more than self-serving "I don't like this, so change it" tripe that you feel adding "QoL Improvement" label to makes acceptable. "It's a QoL Improvement" is the second most commonly used excuse for promoting bad ideas, right behind "Think of the newbies" and just in front of "But it's so easy to code."



most of the OP is just quality of life. Just like it was QoL when they added the infobar above prop mods to see speed with it on. or range of different mods by hovering over them.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#19 - 2015-10-14 04:46:54 UTC
Iain Cariaba wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
2) if I had come on here suggesting something that does add "fun" to the game, such as a new ship class or module, you'd be in here asking what role, niche, or need it fills that is currently an issue.
So, a player can't come on to the forums and suggest something "fun" because it's not needed.
A player cannot come and suggest something that is needed because it's not "fun" or others state nothing new needs to be added.

Your suggestions here, in fact most of your suggestions to date, are neither needed or add fun. Your suggestions are nothing more than self-serving "I don't like this, so change it" tripe that you feel adding "QoL Improvement" label to makes acceptable. "It's a QoL Improvement" is the second most commonly used excuse for promoting bad ideas, right behind "Think of the newbies" and just in front of "But it's so easy to code."


Truthfully, the same can be said about players that say no.
Sure, there may be bad ideas, but there are also some really entertaining ideas that some players beat to the ground with claims of "not needed" and other forms of no that have nothing to do with balance or implementation.
It's literally saying no for the sake of it tsaying no, or because the suggestion doesn't benefit them directly in any way.

Example would be buffing tractor range on Marauders or exchanging their tractor bonus for a velocity bonus on MTUs.
There are people that say no to theses suggestions, not because it would be so OP, but because they don't fly Marauders and don't think others should get the bonus.

It actually seems like you're had print a grudge against me, because you don't like the vast majority of my thoughts, or because you think I'm a carebear, or maybe just like telling me no for some reason.
I only say that because I would think 1-3 of my above suggestions wet non-controversial and actually made the life of EVERY Eve player just a little bit better.
Now, the flac on 4 was totally expected and don't bother me. It was just a suggestion to see how people felt about it.

As far as 5, I expected disdain for that as well, though only because very few people on the forums actually use salvage drones, and the lack of those people is made up for an over abundance of people that despise the players that would use salvage drones, or even salvage for that matter, as it suggests those people are carebears.
To that I say, this game allows those activities and actually makes them rather simple.
So, why are we arguing semantics?
It's not a balancing issue. It's not an issue with handouts. Sure, it enables more laziness, but if you're forced to manually manage salvage drones, you're more likely to quit out of boredom and annoyance than to quit because it's too hard...
It's not hard at all.. It's just freaking annoying as hell..
Iain Cariaba
#20 - 2015-10-14 05:05:23 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
It actually seems like you're had print a grudge against me, because you don't like the vast majority of my thoughts, or because you think I'm a carebear, or maybe just like telling me no for some reason.

Honestly, you became one of my favorite people to argue with here because you used to argue the points of your suggestions. Lately, however, you've stopped doing that, instead focusing on how bad those who tell you no are.

I don't say no to suggestions unless I actually think they're bad ideas. If I see a suggestion I agree with, as rare as that occurs, I say so. If I have no opinion on a suggestion, which happens a lot more often, then I say nothing. I'm pretty sure a lot of the people who post here do the same thing.

Joe Risalo wrote:
It's just freaking annoying as hell..

There's a lot about this game I find annoying, but just because I find it so doesn't mean it needs to be changed. PI, mining, building stuff is all annoying as hell to me. Rather than try to change the things Imdon't like that other people do enjiy, I simply don't do any of it.
123Next page