These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Suggestions: Sov/Allainces/Coaltions
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jean-Baptiste Zorginho
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2014-01-20 18:54:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Jean-Baptiste Zorginho
Endovior wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
Why is it that every time there's a huge fight, the ideas in this forum not only get more repetitive than usual, but they actually manage to make the damn things WORSE?


Simple, it's troll logic.

"I don't like x, therefore x should be broken and ruined for everyone"


Well, you can't blame people for actually wanting to "fight" in eve without being killed while loading grid for 2h. That's not trolling, that's just common sense - especially when you're paying to play that game. So you're suggesting instead of proposing things to help solve the current issues it's better to stfu and do nothing. Why should CCP even develope this game any further, it all seems to be fine when I read your comments in here.

Why not be constructive for a change instead of the usual bla posts in here, you're trolls, not the author. I don't agree with him on all points but he makes some good points, worth discussing further. And I guess the reason WHY there are always a shitload of new topics about this after huge fights (if you even can call the **** up in hed a "fight") is because in every huge fight the same f**** up problems occure. And instead of releasing "cool" stuff like the ESS it would make more sense to tackle these issues - because they're the reason why people stop playing eve. And less players is bad for every one of us, even trolls.

And btw. the silence of CCP about HED is astonishing.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#22 - 2014-01-21 00:42:04 UTC
I'll be constructive about people's ideas when people stop trying to win the race to the bottom in terms of the quality of them.

This idea is abysmal. Like a lot of the others posted. It makes the game harder to play casually, but any semi-organised group can simply work around it. It is inherently anti-sandbox as it forces multiple arbitrary limits on people, and removes a variety of forms of gameplay people currently enjoy. For no reason at all.


Is that more constructive, or do I have to go through and point out why it's an awful idea to actively prevent me from seeing if someone in my ratting system is a friend, a random WH guy, or a cyno alt with fifty bombers on hand?
Jean-Baptiste Zorginho
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-01-21 02:24:06 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
I'll be constructive about people's ideas when people stop trying to win the race to the bottom in terms of the quality of them.

This idea is abysmal. Like a lot of the others posted. It makes the game harder to play casually, but any semi-organised group can simply work around it. It is inherently anti-sandbox as it forces multiple arbitrary limits on people, and removes a variety of forms of gameplay people currently enjoy. For no reason at all.


Is that more constructive, or do I have to go through and point out why it's an awful idea to actively prevent me from seeing if someone in my ratting system is a friend, a random WH guy, or a cyno alt with fifty bombers on hand?


I never said it was the brightest idea, but what would you propose to help this problem?

On the other hand, the suggested system doesn't restrict you to set personal standings to individuals, just not whole corporations/alliances. This means you still see who's at war with you, your friends are blue, etc. etc. And to be honest, if you've ever flown in a larger alliance I doubt that people will manage to use out-of-game tools to set standings right, most people have a hard time not to lemming, use wrong fittings or even listen to the most simple commands on fleet - sure the FC could use such tools, would work with drone assist. Everything besides that and the day-to-day life with renters and so on would be crippled. Oh, no renters, now that would be cool ;)

All I want to see is a constructive discussion, not that "it's bad and you're a troll"-attitude. Help the author and the rest see the pragmatic weakness and maybe show a better alternative - because the problem is there, not something the author imagined.
Previous page12