Test Server Feedback

qft

Ok... Then I propose that we make all complexes have this new anti-multibox feature as well.

Why should it be mandatory that all Hacking and Arch sites be shielded from multiboxers when I can run a 10/10 multibox and get 1-2b+

"You can't run a 10/10 that easily multi-boxed"
Then make the high level hacking sites as difficult to run multi-boxed without this new gimmick


Why are you and some of the other CSM so intent on making sure that Hacking and Arch sites MUST require two+ people to run when I can run a 5/10-6/10 complex solo and more than likely make as much isk if not more....

It almost seems as if you want to punish any solo player who isn't fielding a 1b+ ship and EVEN THEN in this situation it wouldn't help you one bit.

Am I stating that I want to breeze through every hacking site no of course not. I am saying that the risk reward should remain constant... The higher level the site the more difficult the more risk I take running it solo or multi-boxed if even possible

Well actually they already are somewhat similar. In order to completely maximize your ISK haul in a complex, you'd want to have a buddy along with you to do looting and salvaging. And similar to the can spew, he sits there and does pretty much nothing while watching you be actively engaged with game content. And then when it's all over, you can split the reward with him even though you are the one with the skills and the ship that made the entire thing possible. Of course, that is assuming you can talk somebody into spending their time doing that. So yeah, it already is kinda like can spew.... :-/

I understand that you can't represent everyone and that you are allowed to express your own opinion even if (and sometimes especially because) it contradicts some players. My issue was more with the wording and tone of the post.


This seems to acknowledge that some players have issues with the new feature and then literally tells them to 'get over' it. Where as something like...



Seems less confrontational.

It's all about PR and spin, you're a politician now, I'm afraid this is stuff you need to consider. But at least you didn't refer to people as 'spoiled little whiners'

You, uh, do realize that CCP went ahead and made the cans so slow that a reasonably capable player can get nearly all of them now, right? I mean, it kinda pokes a hole in your theory there...

Some people have valid complaints with the spew. I tried it for a few hours and my wrists were throbbing. I found it a headache inducing, eye straining and extremely frustrating experience.

Also explorers are used to getting nothing for their efforts, so I think you are misreading the intent behind most of the posts. The RNG on loot drops is a fickle and cruel mistress. While some posts have noted the negative psychological aspect of having to watch potential loot float away, it should be obvious that if you were to instead get all the loot that "all" would be significantly less than the current all.

I have seen several much better ideas for loot distribution which integrate the minigame and allow for a dynamic experience. I see you read one and agreed its a good idea. Even if you agree with the intent behind the mechanic (cooperative gameplay) I think there are many far superior and less frustrating ideas out there as to how to achieve those same gameplay goals.

I want to clear up my position here as it does tend to get lost in posts and responses and moves off topic.

I have no problem with the spew can/pinata mechanic or any of the new hacking and scanning, it's all good, different and promotes some new co-op play, I think it achieves what it set out to do.

My issue is that it is focused too much on isk/hour, loot value and feels like just another way to make money in a game that already has lots of ways to make isk. Like a job where you need to maintain your level of productivity.

I wanted exploration, and archaeology in particular, to focus more on the discovery and story elements of EVE Online and to bridge the large gap between the in-game world and the lore rich website content, like Evelopdia, the chronicles, news reports and yes even the EVE books. I was looking forward to an activity in EVE that used some of the games excellent story and wasn't just a means to make money and fund player corps, wars and conflict.

Outside of the epic missions there isn't any story in EVE the isn't player driven or Corp politics. New Eden's in-game world feels static and unconnected to the events written about NPC actions. I didn't even notice Souro Foiritan had been out of office until I read 'Templar One'. Despite massive changes within the Armarr leadership out of game they still feel the same in-game.

I know EVE is a player driven sandbox, but if the story isn't important why is it there? Minecraft is a sandbox, has no story and is still an excellent game.

And I kind of hoped Odyssey was the beginning of bridging that gap and enriching the story of New Eden for players. That's why to me personally the new exploration is a good well designed activity to do in EVE Online, but it's not exploration.

If I could make but one change to the new content it would be that the relic sites with salvage loot use existing assets in space, but sites that actually have relics use the new Terran ship derelict and just the derelict (clouds and rocks are fine) so that there is a feel of finding something long forgotten and hidden. Nothing shatters that feeling quicker than finding an ancient ship and seeing it in space along side Empire station ruins, Pirate structures or any number of assets you've already seen running missions and complexes..

Not really just means that they went too far....
Your keyword is nearly.. still means a solo player will still be put off enough after time just because of the mechanics and missing a couple of cans.

I have been playing for a very very long time and I know you have been around since the start.
Eve is always and should always be the giant sandbox...

If you want to play solo you can play solo
If you come to a harder challenge you just need more skills and a better ship or a group of lesser skilled players
If you come to great challenges you can't beat no matter the skill or ship you need a group
If you want to play with a group made up of yourself to overcome those same great challenges you can

The current system does away with that as a blanket ban....

I guess my question to you is simple.
Why do you feel that all hacking and Arch sites should require multiple players no matter what the difficulty of the challenge is.
Doesn't matter if I have 100+SP char with a +1b properly fit ship.
Doesn't matter if I have 4 accounts that I am multi-boxing at once that can easily run almost any other site/mission/plex in the game.

Just that currently every hacking/Arch site no matter the level or difficulty must have two people running it to get the full reward....

New system is bad. It's not about skills of your character. It's about your clicking skill.

In my opinion the discussion is moving in a rather unconstructive direction here. Could we please get back to the part where can spewing is bad not because you don't get enough loot (which already has been fixed mostly) but because Eve's space view is rather terrible for twitchy gameplay and nobody in their right mind would actually enjoy sitting around waiting for someone else to do the actual hacking gameplay just to take part in that rather annoying catch-the-can game (and possibly spamming dscan before which is even less enjoyable)?

Well, let me answer in the roughly translated and shortened words of a comedian: 'You all know this sentence: "Everything was better in the past." That's bollocks! Nothing was better in the past! But some things were good in the past and they would still be good today if people had kept their damn fingers off them.'
And just so I don't get misunderstood here, I'm not saying exploration didn't need some work, I'm simply trying to counter your notion that change as such is positive.

I'm about as anti-alt as it gets, but you can't tell me that it's not possible to design a hacking minigame in a way that it prohibits alt play. I already mentioned in the other thread that some part of the gameplay needs to be twitchy and real-time to some degree to achieve the anti-alt goal, but in case of the hacking game it would at least be in a seperate window and hopefully without moving parts that are floating on top of each other.

Nobody said that and they don't require multiple players. There is no god-given right to get all loot solo, even though I agree that loot collecting is the worst possible part of an activity to encourage group play from a game design perspective.