These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2007-10-30 17:54
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-04-07 15:39
  • Likes Received: 0

MeBiatch

Security Status 0.0
  • GRR GOONS Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • [December] Balance Smorgasbord in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Bruce T Wolf wrote:
    Well after having invested a massive amount of time training skills around the Gila I am pissed about the nerf.


    I mean totally its not like all of those skills affect other ships in the game... total waste of time.

  • [December] Remote Rep Tiericide and Falloff in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Any chance we will also see Ancillary remote repair mods? .. increase the rep amount then add a 40 second reload

  • Changes to gridsize in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Great work... any chance now that the grid is bigger we can get more then 250km max target range?

    There are so many ships and setups that can in theory target past that but we are cutt of for some silly reason

  • [New Structures] Condensed thread in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Just add the ability to semi to fully dock... semi dock is the mechanic as proposed. fully dock is the standard interior dock that allows the current system...


    CCP please ask yourself how many times has removing existing functionality worked well for you guys?

    I think the idea of semi docked being able to see whats outside of the citadel is awesome... but please let me fully dock if i want :)

  • [New structures] Mooring and docking features in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Just add the ability to semi to fully dock... semi dock is the mechanic as proposed. fully dock is the standard interior dock that allows the current system...


    CCP please ask yourself how many times has removing existing functionality worked well for you guys?

    I think the idea of semi docked being able to see whats outside of the citadel is awesome... but please let me fully dock if i want :)

  • Dev blog: Reworking Capital Ships: And thus it begins! in EVE Information Center

    A few things I wish you guys added...

    I recently started to play the game again and found that my capital ships was way down on one side of the map and my corp on the other...

    I tried to calculate in jump planer how long it would take to move my ship over... funny thing happened jump planner crashed saying it would take too long to calculate.

    I really wish there was a booster that you could take that double jump distance and removed jump fatigue for a total of 24 hours. This booster could only be used once every 3 months or up to 4 times a year.

    This would allow me as a player who comes back to the game every now and then the ability to catch up with my bros... it would be balanced by only being active for 24 hours and only can be used once every 90 days.

    the other thing i would like you to add is the following:
    Two tech II dreads Two tech II carriers.

    Detla Force Carriers/faxes and Dreads

    They have special new Jump drives similar to those found in jump-freighters that reduce jump fatigue and extender jump range up to 7.5 Ly

    because more room is used to house the enhanced jump drive delta force carriers/faxes and dreads have lower dps/ehp/reppability then their tech I counter parts

    The second class of tech II capitals are designed for home defence and worm hole space: they have no jump drive as jump drives are superfluous in worm hole space.... with all this extra room these tech II juggernaughts have more ehp/dps/reppability then their tech I counter parts... the carrier will get reduced versions of the super carriers projected anti blob weapons and so too will the tech II dread get a mini doomsday

  • Customizable "Local" settings in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Danika Princip wrote:


    Thus giving you the information much, much quicker and easier than before, thus making local a more powerful intel tool...


    not more powerful more reliable. it makes local more redundant... having by design a system where you constantly have to pull a slide bar up and down to see if that new local is negative heck at a certain point it becomes incoherent and local looses all intel value... i would argue its just better design and allows it to scale.

    Intel in local as it stand works really powerful in low density systems but becomes useless in high density systems... ccp is designing new systems to increase density in places like 0.0 it only makes sense design wise to make in game tools that scale with said design goals...

  • Customizable "Local" settings in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Danika Princip wrote:


    How, exactly, does this not make local a more powerful intel tool?


    it gives you no new information that you did not have before... it just removes the tedium...

  • Customizable "Local" settings in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Danika Princip wrote:
    Oh, hey, it's another 'please make local an even more powerful intel tool because I am too damn lazy to read' thread!

    No.


    this does not make local more powerful it simply makes it customizable.

    its a quality of life improvement and IMO would be welcome by anyone who would want to use the feature... if you dont like it then you do not have to use it...

    but like overview settings having tabs... i think once people start to use they would wonder how they got along before it...

    its simply allowing the player to custom people for delayed local based on standings.

  • Customizable "Local" settings in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I am a big fan of having custom settings on the overview... as it provides key abilities for intel and combat.

    the other really great tool in eve for intel is local...

    in some place local can be extremely cluttered here's looking at you jita... in others local is key to knowing if neutrals or negatives have come into the system...

    what I propose is having the ability to select what will show up in local. by show up I mean thier character... by not showing up I mean they will become delayed until they talk in local.

    that way if i am in Jita I can set Local to show only war targets... or if i am in a highly populated missioning system i can do the same... or if i am ratting in 0.0 in a high density system Ill know immediately if a negative came in the system.

    have the custom local setting setups next to the open channel window button on the local hud... (much like they look for ovierview)


    a-A- * 0.0 ( ) [JITA] [mission] [0.0} (26) (0)}

  • [December] Balance Smorgasbord in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Quote:
    Quality of life bonus for roaming Sacs


    so we talking boxers or briefs?

  • Dev blog: EVE Online Roadmap Update (Winter 2015-Spring 2016) in EVE Information Center

    falloff for RR?!?!?!?! hell yes... finally 80km logi will be no more... here is hoping for 60km optimal 20km falloff..

    its a start but RR still needs to stack IMO...

    also tech II desies!??!?!?! wooohoooooo!

  • [December] Missile Disruptors and Tweaks to Missile Guidance Mods in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Awesome. .. thumbs up on this one... cant wait to play with setups on sisi

  • The PR is getting old in EVE Communication Center

    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Kazini Jax wrote:
    "Long story short, we have had long meetings about the structure attack system, and came to the conclusion that, while Entosis Links do indeed achieve our design goals for the Citadels, they are not actually delivering an experience we are satisfied to provide."


    CCP was quite satisfied with it otherwise CCP wouldn't have had 'long meetings' about it. It was the user base that doesn't like the stale mechanics of Entosis links. Call it what it is and quit trying to mislead us. This tactic is getting real, REAL old and I am sure it plays a role in your bleeding of users. I know, cause I am ready to permanently close my 3+ accounts over it.


    To be blunt, I didn't have your specific little special feelings in mind when I wrote the blog. I am a senior game designer, not a PR person. Of course a portion of the player base doesn't like the Entosis mechanics, and of course that played a role in our meetings. Of course player feedback influenced the team decision to adopt straight damage for structures.

    That doesn't change the fact the team also wanted to bring this straight damage connection back in the game, for the reasons we explained in the blog. We were not trying to mislead you on purpose, we were trying to make you happy. Of all the things you could say, that is what you come up with? How about, thank you? Sad

    I am not sure how much you realize how open-minded and communicative we are trying to be here. Especially guys like CCP Nullarbor who are doing their very best to tell you guys about changes we are not even sure yet. Ask the CSM to which lengths we are willing to go to adapt our designs to make sure the Citadel release brings the enjoyment you guys deserve.

    To be selfishly honest here, it would be much simpler for us to cover our ears and just go straight for the initial designs we first thought of. That doesn't require any drastic changes in the concept, no extra damage calculation, no HP mitigation and so on. We wouldn't have to spend time reading the forums, reddit, speaking on Slack, with the CSM or other communication channels we usually monitor. Every time we iterate on a feature we have to spend quite a significant amount of resources to implement it. That costs man-hours.

    We are willing to go to the extra mile to try and come up with the best feature we possibly can. You have no idea how disheartening this kind of message can be after you've spent months trying to come up with the best possible option.

    Of course, we can make mistakes, which is why we are trying to be open in our approach, we want, no we need your feedback. But by the love of whatever god you praise, please be constructive when you do so. We deserve some minimum amount of respect, and this kind of posts serves little practical purpose.


    Thank you.


    I have yo ssy you arey favorite french man ever!!! Ty ccp you guys are awesome and we love you guys and gals

  • [Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ty fozz... cant wait to see whats in store for battleships

  • Dev Blog: Next set of Sov and Capital Movement Iterations in EVE Information Center

    159Pinky wrote:
    So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled


    or maybe you should bring MJD ships.

  • Dev Blog: Next set of Sov and Capital Movement Iterations in EVE Information Center

    Marcus Tedric wrote:
    I'm sad that the fitting restriction is to Interceptors only - it's too trite.

    Much more sensible would be to restrict it to Destroyers, perhaps even Cruisers, and above - due to 'size' constraints.


    I dunno I think from lore perspective this supposed to be some super advanced Jove module that can hack anything it would have to go on a ship that was designed for electronics warfare...

    but apparently that goes against the stated design of atrons that can capture systems.

  • Dev Blog: Next set of Sov and Capital Movement Iterations in EVE Information Center

    All Positive so far. Thanks for acting on this and iteration as you promised.

    I can only say i hope the weekend CSM summit goes well and next week i get to mull over the proposed capital changes... Since its really hard to judge this new system without them being rebalanced.

  • [Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Galphii wrote:
    MeBiatch wrote:

    ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.

    make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.

    this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.

    so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...

    but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.

    This would be my preference - the freedom to choose how to capture and defend sov. Small gangs can go the anom route while others who choose do to so can still use the grunt of their big ships. The biggest problem with domsov was capital imbalances, but instead of addressing them a new system was built to exclude them entirely.

    Rebalance caps, depower supercaps and allow for this blend of styles in aegis sov.



    take hero vs pl in catch with this version of sov... now every time pl would drop thier super cap blob hero would have been able to beat pl to the punch by wining the capture annoms.

    This would have then forced pl to focus on sub cap doctrines which would have made them vulnerable over a constellation wide fight.

    A counter to this could be a combined attack on the cfc by a noob friendly alliance and a supercapital heavy alliance.

    lets say with the new aegis/dominion combined sov instead of pl/nc and hero fighting they decided to invade the cfc.

    in theory they could pull off sub capital and capital dominance and put up a actual threat to the cfc...

  • [Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Reagalan wrote:
    I'm saying this as nicely as possible. Fozziesov is a broken and fundamentally flawed system. No amount of tweaking will ever make it work as well as either of the two previous sov systems.

    The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.


    I disagree. AFAIK one of the main reasons you guys won b-r was that you were able to lock down adjacent systems keeping out capital reinforcements.

    ill say it again make fozziesov a mesh between structure and elink grind.

    make it so you use the elink to reinforce the 1st time then you have to use elinks for the 1st capture event.

    this then would cause the second reinforce which would then disable the shields and allow the structure to be shoot at.

    so now you can put your capitals to work and attack the structure...

    but even though the structure is vulnerable you can also choose to capture the annoms spread throughout the consultation.

    So no you have a b-r type situation where you have your capital fight over the structure and then a bunch of sub cap fights over the capture annoms.

Forum Signature

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.