These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Rebuttal: Nerf Without Cause: Jump Drives

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#161 - 2013-01-16 11:01:54 UTC
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
Force projection = to easy... if u red what i and many others were writing u might even understand it.

All I've read is you saying that it's too easy, without explaining why it's too easy or why it's a problem.

Zloco Crendraven wrote:
U can jump to far to quick. Add timers, nerf ranges, put a mass limit, whatever.

And you still haven't explained why jumping as far as we can is TOO far, or why as quickly as it is is TOO quickly.


I could just as easily say "frigates warp too fast, they can travel 120 AU in 20 seconds, that's far too fast" but you obviously wouldn't be satisfied because just telling me how fast it is doesn't explain why that's too fast or what problem it causes.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#162 - 2013-01-16 11:16:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Zloco Crendraven
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
Force projection = to easy... if u red what i and many others were writing u might even understand it.

All I've read is you saying that it's too easy, without explaining why it's too easy or why it's a problem.

Zloco Crendraven wrote:
U can jump to far to quick. Add timers, nerf ranges, put a mass limit, whatever.

And you still haven't explained why jumping as far as we can is TOO far, or why as quickly as it is is TOO quickly.


I could just as easily say "frigates warp too fast, they can travel 120 AU in 20 seconds, that's far too fast" but you obviously wouldn't be satisfied because just telling me how fast it is doesn't explain why that's too fast or what problem it causes.


Ahm because is a game killer for majority of EVE?

It is same when u all Goonies shouted out loud for nerfing SCs and Titans and still they were working as intended. But not as u intended ofc.

Frigates warping to fast, is not a gamebreaker.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#163 - 2013-01-16 11:40:28 UTC
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#164 - 2013-01-16 11:42:38 UTC
Oh neat this thread again.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#165 - 2013-01-16 12:22:57 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#166 - 2013-01-16 12:28:10 UTC
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

No, it hasn't. All you've been saying is "it's too fast, it should be nerfed".

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#167 - 2013-01-16 12:38:36 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

No, it hasn't. All you've been saying is "it's too fast, it should be nerfed".

Actually, we're going nowhere.

GENERAL DISUSSSIIIONNNNN~~~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#168 - 2013-01-16 13:00:53 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

No, it hasn't. All you've been saying is "it's too fast, it should be nerfed".


TL: DR

Only few alliances (a minority) have capabilities to be omnipresent (wherever, whenever) all around New Eden atm. Those few Alliances can wage war in one part of the galaxy, defend their moons in another, and gank as a third (non invited) party some chaps that are Capital brawling around lowsec without any major hassles.

It was the same when DRF (a minority) had the SC/Titan advantage and was blaping whole EVEs assses all around and whole EVE was spamming forums about it just as majority of EVE is spamming about the force projection now.

U see the problem? Of course not, because is working as itended for you.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#169 - 2013-01-16 13:02:48 UTC
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

No, it hasn't. All you've been saying is "it's too fast, it should be nerfed".


TL: DR

Only few alliances (a minority) have capabilities to be omnipresent (wherever, whenever) all around New Eden atm. Those few Alliances can wage war in one part of the galaxy, defend their moons in another, and gank as a third (non invited) party some chaps that are Capital brawling around lowsec without any major hassles.

It was the same when DRF (a minority) had the SC/Titan advantage and was blaping whole EVEs assses all around and whole EVE was spamming forums about it just as majority of EVE is spamming about the force projection now.

U see the problem? Of course not, because is working as itended for you.

I think you missed the part where that's not going to change no matter how you decide to nerf it, because we'll find a way around it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#170 - 2013-01-16 13:07:30 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Zloco Crendraven wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Okay, so we're getting somewhere.
Now you explain what part of the game it's breaking and how it's being broken.


It has been explained over and over again and i am not going to repeat my and other words anymore. When u ll ve some decent arguments write it down.

No, it hasn't. All you've been saying is "it's too fast, it should be nerfed".


TL: DR

Only few alliances (a minority) have capabilities to be omnipresent (wherever, whenever) all around New Eden atm. Those few Alliances can wage war in one part of the galaxy, defend their moons in another, and gank as a third (non invited) party some chaps that are Capital brawling around lowsec without any major hassles.

It was the same when DRF (a minority) had the SC/Titan advantage and was blaping whole EVEs assses all around and whole EVE was spamming forums about it just as majority of EVE is spamming about the force projection now.

U see the problem? Of course not, because is working as itended for you.

I think you missed the part where that's not going to change no matter how you decide to nerf it, because we'll find a way around it.


Well good for you. And if u do, i ll bow to the mighty CFC. But as it stands now, it is simply broken.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
RomeStar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#171 - 2013-01-16 13:51:47 UTC
Sofia Wolf wrote:
Hi Rome, nice to hear form you o7

But I'd like to ask people to refrain from excessive conspiracy theorising, I don't want this thread locked by CCP.



Sofia

I apoligize for trolling your thread and because you aproached my trolling in a respectful manner I promise not to troll anymore of your posts out of respect.


Rome

Signatured removed, CCP Phantom
Seleia O'Sinnor
Drop of Honey
#172 - 2013-01-16 13:57:17 UTC
Defending your turf looks too easy. Mobility should be decreased for such big forces. I am not going into comparing real life with Eve, it'd be just more fun if major power blocks had to field 10x more active players to keep a grip on their current grounds.

Odyssey: Repacking in POS hangars for modules +1,  but please for other stuff too, especially containers. Make containers openable in POS hangars.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#173 - 2013-01-16 13:58:30 UTC
Seleia O'Sinnor wrote:
Defending your turf looks too easy. Mobility should be decreased for such big forces. I am not going into comparing real life with Eve, it'd be just more fun if major power blocks had to field 10x more active players to keep a grip on their current grounds.

So you're basically saying you WANT to make things harder on smaller groups than on larger groups?

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#174 - 2013-01-16 14:09:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Andski wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
You like jumping in a non jumping ship (jf etc) enjoy a 120 second timer of not doing a damned thing once you land. Call it a "magnetic realignment".


This is dumb because it'd make supercaps literally immune when tacklers can't do a damn thing after being bridged in and they'd have plenty of warning when hostile tacklers are on the way



And would do away with jumping directly into a fight and would not hamper the ability of actually traveling which is what everyone is bitching about.

Use some sort of alignment cooldown and the only thing taken away would be the ability to directly engage a fight, which is about the only travel method that does NOT employ some sort of invulvnerability that would constitute as being "op".

Would also enforce the method of having to strategically place a front to engage from, which logistically, is a bit better anyways. Since we are talking about titan bridging for the sake of fighting and not cyno alts in rookie ships etc, or traveling which would in fact not help at all, but also would not hinder.


Next trolling comment please.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#175 - 2013-01-16 14:24:24 UTC
Some Rando wrote:
Mynnna speaks from experience in a sov-holding null-sec alliance.
OP speaks from experience gained from a Youtube video.
Mynnna is an obvious member of a sov-holding null-sec alliance.
OP is a member of a high-sec NPC corp.

OP is speaking a little bit out of their league.

and we have never heard anything about "0.0 is broken" from 0.0 sov holders Cool

while we are here what league would you only allow to speak about 0.0? Someone from leadership? Or regular alliance members are still allowed to speak? Shocked

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#176 - 2013-01-16 14:40:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Wow didn't realize so many pages lol.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#177 - 2013-01-16 14:42:47 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Some Rando wrote:
Mynnna speaks from experience in a sov-holding null-sec alliance.
OP speaks from experience gained from a Youtube video.
Mynnna is an obvious member of a sov-holding null-sec alliance.
OP is a member of a high-sec NPC corp.

OP is speaking a little bit out of their league.

and we have never heard anything about "0.0 is broken" from 0.0 sov holders Cool

while we are here what league would you only allow to speak about 0.0? Someone from leadership? Or regular alliance members are still allowed to speak? Shocked

You're obviously allowed to speak, the point is that you're not particularly likely to know what you're talking about if your only experience in EVE is as a high-sec NPC corp member running missions.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#178 - 2013-01-16 14:52:04 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Ryuu Shi wrote:
RomeStar wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Any reasonable change CCP would make would be only a minimal burden to large organizations. ]

Well of course we dont want to disturb the harmony of those large organizations afterall arent the goons the ones pulling the strings at CCP?

Ignorance at its best. Please take the door to the left and biomass please.Pirate

No amount of 'fixing force projections via nerf cyno to X' will stop well established alliances from doing what they do. As how others have mentioned, we work as a team (very large team) to get things done. Want some SOV space? Get a bigger team. Don't like the idea? Join the bigger team... what the OP suggests will just make things harder for the little guys NOT easier i.e cyno gets nerfed - > build more ships. Build more ships -> get more nerf. Get more nerf -> Build more... see where this is going?

It's like Malcanis' law but in reverse. If you try to nerf the big guys, you end up nerfing the small ones even worse because they're already having trouble.

Unless they join a blob Cool



Isn't that what 80% of the Goons contributing to this thread are saying needs to be done anyways? I'd think that this would help accomplish those means. Instead, you have an argument where it's a bad idea because smaller groups need friends and to join bigger groups, but if what we are saying would be the case, it would hurt the smaller groups and force them to join a larger group.

If it's a win:win situation, why argue in the first place?

Kind of tanks credibility at that point doesn't it?

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#179 - 2013-01-16 14:56:39 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Well, if you all insist there is nothing wrong, lets see how far we can take it.

I propose all jump and bridge ranges be increased ten fold.

How does that sound?


A tenfold increase in their range would be just as excessive a buff as removing jump bridges and the Jump Drive Cal skill entirely would be an excessive nerf. That said, I did not say "I think CCP is stupid and shouldn't change it", I said "If CCP thinks it needs to be changed, I'd work with them on it but stand by the fact that a range nerf is a stupid approach."

And actually backing myself up a bit, a range nerf for the purpose of helping smaller entities is what's stupid, really. If you just want to nerf everyone's ability to project power via capital ships, it's actually not a completely terrible way of doing it.



Since Andski said the idea was stupid in regards to combat power projection, from a logistic standpoint Mynnna, how would having a "realignment timer" affect your argument about using transport and jump bridges? Would it have a devastating afect such as range and increased of jumps, or would it actually not affect jump freighting (minus time) and help with regulating the combat aspect as alot of us are vying for?

Not affecting jump freighting range, but affecting lock up timers is what I'm going for here.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#180 - 2013-01-16 15:08:08 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
And would do away with jumping directly into a fight and would not hamper the ability of actually traveling which is what everyone is bitching about.

Use some sort of alignment cooldown and the only thing taken away would be the ability to directly engage a fight, which is about the only travel method that does NOT employ some sort of invulvnerability that would constitute as being "op".

Would also enforce the method of having to strategically place a front to engage from, which logistically, is a bit better anyways. Since we are talking about titan bridging for the sake of fighting and not cyno alts in rookie ships etc, or traveling which would in fact not help at all, but also would not hinder.

Next trolling comment please.


so supercaps literally never dying is, to you, an acceptable tradeoff for some gatecamps not getting crashed by subcaps titan bridging in

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar