These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[CSM] December Summit - Little things - FW, Wormholes

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2011-11-25 10:09:17 UTC
Bomberlocks wrote:
Trebor, Two Step, please go though Hans Jagerblitzen's thread on FW improvements carefully, so that there is no wasted effort on FW.


Will do.

WRT ice in WH's, this is by design, to prevent WH's from being self-sufficient.

Super Chair: I agree in general with these ideas.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
#22 - 2011-11-25 14:42:41 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

WRT ice in WH's, this is by design, because it is a pain in the arse to haul ice products through w-space and CCP likes to make wh dwellers cry..



Fixed that part for you.

It's not like there isn't alot of other "large volume" crap we are forced to haul in using itty 5's through unfriendly systems ? C5 & c6 wh's occasionally get highsec access to push a freigher load worth of crap through but the rest of us gets to slowboat iterons around for hours on end.

Not fun, and it would hardly be gamebreaking for w-space to get their own ice. I mean even the plebes in highsec have it for christ sake.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2011-11-25 16:28:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:

WRT ice in WH's, this is by design, to prevent WH's from being self-sufficient.


That doesn't make sence anymore... Lets say an entire corp lives in a C5. These guys are not going into know space everyday interacting with the rest of the eve community. In actual fact they hardly ever go to K space. Once in a while they will need to take their loot to sell in HS, and when they do they will bring the ice fuel in with them. This doesn't require the participation of each member - just a small team.

Please see my suggestion on page one.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
MNagy
Yo-Mama
#24 - 2011-11-25 16:50:33 UTC
I would like to add one more thing to the list here that has to do not only with WH's but also with HS and LS and Null Sec.

So anywhere in the eve universe...

If a POS is anchored but offlined, any player should have the ability to unanchor it.
-That and any structure that goes with it.

Lets start cleaning up all those "POS Position Holders" out there that are not running and allow someone to make profit for the cleanup.

As well, if you POS bash a pos anywhere - why do you need to destroy everything to get at the items. Why cannot you use the codebreaker mod or something to crack the safe and get at the goodies and the Structure.

Too many wh's have dead POS - or "Backup" pos's.

Either a POS is online and is running, or is in stront mode...
Or its a dead pos and can be taken.

To add to that, the same should apply to secure containers. Any container anywhere in EVE universe should be codebreaked to get at whats inside.

Its annoying to fly into an astroid belt in HS to see a billino Secure containers...

M.
Tahna Rouspel
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2011-11-25 16:54:00 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:


WRT ice in WH's, this is by design, to prevent WH's from being self-sufficient.


It doesn't make sense to me. Why is it wrong to have wormhole self-sufficient on an equal level to null-sec? I hear nullsec has access to ice.
Does this make them too self-sufficient? Then why not remove ice from null-sec then?

My bottom line; I want to be self-sufficient. Being forced to haul ice from known space is not fun.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2011-11-25 17:10:20 UTC
MNagy wrote:
I would like to add one more thing to the list here that has to do not only with WH's but also with HS and LS and Null Sec.

So anywhere in the eve universe...

If a POS is anchored but offlined, any player should have the ability to unanchor it.
-That and any structure that goes with it.

Lets start cleaning up all those "POS Position Holders" out there that are not running and allow someone to make profit for the cleanup.

As well, if you POS bash a pos anywhere - why do you need to destroy everything to get at the items. Why cannot you use the codebreaker mod or something to crack the safe and get at the goodies and the Structure.

Too many wh's have dead POS - or "Backup" pos's.

Either a POS is online and is running, or is in stront mode...
Or its a dead pos and can be taken.

To add to that, the same should apply to secure containers. Any container anywhere in EVE universe should be codebreaked to get at whats inside.

Its annoying to fly into an astroid belt in HS to see a billino Secure containers...

M.


Agreed. It should required the T2 code breaker and should take between 15 and 30 minutes to unanchor a offline pos.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Jenn Makanen
Doomheim
#27 - 2011-11-25 17:28:15 UTC
I'd suggest having an offline timer. So it has to be offline for a couple of days before you can steal it. Stops a little QQ (couldn't log in to refuel due to [legit reason]), without getting rid of the main reason.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-11-25 17:33:58 UTC
Jenn Makanen wrote:
I'd suggest having an offline timer. So it has to be offline for a couple of days before you can steal it. Stops a little QQ (couldn't log in to refuel due to [legit reason]), without getting rid of the main reason.


There is no legit reason to not have a months worth of fuel in your pos, other than death or tsunami. Big smile

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#29 - 2011-11-25 18:46:48 UTC
With POSs, I agree they should be unanchorable.. sure use codebreakers or whatever, doesn't matter. But this also kickstarts salvaging into a profession. Even those who don't want the moon or the POS can hack, scoop, and sell the tower.


Faction War needs more enemy elements. I've suggested before adding pirate factions and allowing corps to join those malitias. It also goes along with my proposal to have variable sec status on the empire borders inherent to the conflict between pirate and empire factions.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Khudin Hadashur
Doomheim
#30 - 2011-11-25 20:33:34 UTC
Two step wrote:
Remember, this is *little* things. I am still working on my personal list, here is what is on it so far:

1) Shields on ships out of a SMA/entering a Pulsar/joining a fleet
2) Better system than POS passwords for POS access (same UI as chat channels, would be awesome)
3) Capital SMAs allowed in w-space
4) Cans in corp hangers. Should be able to name them, open them, put stuff in them
5) Rename all POS structures
6) Randomness in sleeper spawns
7) Don't change sig ids after DT
8) Capital ship SD timers


Good list right there. I'd increase (6) to not just some randomization in Sleeper spawns but also in what a site actually yields in terms of radar/magneto cans, spacerocks or gas. Makes it maybe a bit bigger than a little thing..

Shared corp bookmarks would have been on the list too if they had not been introduced for Crucible. Hooray for this.

There was some talk about removing high-end ores from lower class wormhole gravimetric sites, this will probably resurface as well during this session?
Trebor Daehdoow
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2011-11-25 22:09:30 UTC
Tahna Rouspel wrote:
It doesn't make sense to me. Why is it wrong to have wormhole self-sufficient on an equal level to null-sec? I hear nullsec has access to ice.


IIRC a concern at the time is that if WH's were self-sufficient, they would quickly be colonized by nullsec alliances and used as secure production facilities.

Private Citizen • CSM in recovery
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#32 - 2011-11-25 22:35:20 UTC
Ice in w-space doesn't count as a little thing, and it is not a bug, it is totally by design. Without the need to haul stuff, there would be a lot less traffic in w-space, and ganking a hauler is often the start of a fun fight.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#33 - 2011-11-25 23:48:24 UTC
Two step wrote:
FW both needs little things and a larger overhaul. Until CCP is willing to commit resources to that larger overhaul, they would like to fix as many smaller FW issues as they can.

Which would be awesome if doable, but every time .. let me repeat that EVERY TIME they have tried to fix a little thing in FW they have broken a whopping big thing. Hell even when they fix things theoretically unrelated to FW something breaks ..

FW is a great big mash-up of code from all over the place .. there is no small fixes available, the best you can do on that scale is tweaking but tweaks are neither wanted not needed .. the base mechanics are what people have been complaining about the past three years.

The perfect solution for me is for CCP to pour everything they have into a rewrite of null sovereignty system and then applying a simplified and slightly modified version of said system to FW. Should make for a much sturdier construct and goes a lot further towards making FW a taste of null warfare without forcing people out to null type deal which was one of the original intentions if I recall.

In short: I second (or however high number, haven't read all posts) the motion to remove the "little things" sticker from FW.
ImmutableDark
Absalom.
#34 - 2011-11-26 01:53:53 UTC
1. Give greater rewards for PVP combat i.e. more LP when you kill someone in the opposing faction.
2. Give LP rewards for taking over opposing faction's complexes (30k lp divided between fleet members).
3. Stop Opposing faction members from docking in your stations.
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#35 - 2011-11-26 02:25:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
All I have to say is that I'm extremely disappointed that for all the feedback players have been working on for years now, providing volumes of discussion about improvement, that once again we are a brief one-word mention in a thread involving wormholes.

We've worked tremendously hard, and written volumes about what we'd like to see, condensed those volumes into lists, linked to them, referenced again, explained in even more volume, more lists, more links, and still, today, both CCP and now the CSM are asking us to explain ourselves one more time.

Asking us to list all these things over again, in the body of a thread like this, is insulting. Since apparently this is an agenda proposed by CCP for discussion, can the CSM at least acknowledge that they've read the list of small fixes commonly agreed upon by the players, and make a point of sharing this with CCP? I know that no current CSM member is a participant in Faction Warfare, but that doesnt mean that it isn't part of CCP's vision (Hilmar said he wanted to see this fixed himself) or part of the player base's vision.

Faction Warfare has NOTHING to do with wormholes. Why the two are included in the same topic list is beyond me. This is probably the most disheartening turn of events in the history of this movement to see iterations on FW. We're finally getting momentum from CCP on development, yet here we are, a single word in the title of a thread, followed by a list of fixes to wormholes, leaving the players to once again beg and plead for even a simple acknowledgment that the list we've compiled will be reviewed and offered to CCP by the CSM, during discussions.

EDIT - The CSM has indeed responded and been receptive to the list of fixes I've sent them, and have committed to making sure they are posted on the internal CSM / CCP forums for debate and possible resolution.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Tahna Rouspel
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2011-11-26 02:32:47 UTC
Hans,

The reason why Faction warfare and Wormholes are tackled together is because they're both activities with a minority of players in them. What percentage of EVE participates in wormholes and faction warfare? 5% maybe?
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#37 - 2011-11-26 02:45:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Hans Jagerblitzen
Tahna Rouspel wrote:
Hans,

The reason why Faction warfare and Wormholes are tackled together is because they're both activities with a minority of players in them. What percentage of EVE participates in wormholes and faction warfare? 5% maybe?


This is a direct result of years of neglect like this. We were not always a minority activity, its become that way because the fans have mostly given up because they've shared their feedback time and time again only to be ignored.

Currently statistics on FW participation have very, very little to do with how many players wish Faction Warfare were given attention.

If the CSM were to take the time to read the feedback, they would see that fixing Faction Warfare has far-reaching benefits to the EvE playerbase at large - increased FW activity provides a healthy role play environment, an abundance of small-gang warfare that players across the board have begged for, economic incentive to live in lowsec, and a food source for piracy, a classic pillar of EvE gameplay. Its not just about FW, its about all the other areas of gameplay FW stands to improve should its basic mechanics be fixed.

My ongoing fight has been and continues to be not just for the die-hard vets that still participate, but for all the frustrated pilots that have walked away, moved elsewhere, or even left the game because of treatment just like this. Its also for every pilot that has ever said, "I wish there was more small gang PvP" or "1 vs 1 fights are dead" or "lowsec is worthless and boring".

CCP said they'd include FW in a list of fixes - than failed to elaborate. This hurt the community deeply, and prompted a great deal of feedback that came from many people, FW participants and non-participants alike.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#38 - 2011-11-26 03:00:46 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
All I have to say is that I'm extremely disappointed in the CSM for taking an issue like FW that the players have been working on for years now, providing volumes of feedback, and the CSM's response is to tack it on as a FOOTNOTE to a thread about wormholes.

Two Step, your "little things" list included nothing about FW. All you had to do is copy paste the list I've already compiled, the work has already been done for the CSM. Please explain, is this a personal list of stuff that you yourself want to see, or is that the list of things you want to see fixed based on what the community has asked for? If this thread is about FW and wormholes, why are there no FW items in your list?

Can the CSM just be honest if FW is a lower priority to you than even wormholes? I think I can speak for all of the FW community when I say we're tired of the lip service. We've worked tremendously hard, and written volumes about what we'd like to see, condensed those volumes into lists, linked to them, referenced again, explained in even more volume, more lists, more links, and still, today, both CCP and now the CSM are asking us to explain ourselves one more time.

Asking us to list all these things over again, in the body of a thread like this, is extremely insulting. If the CSM is clearly not taking the FW community seriously, why than should CCP? We deserve to know whether this is actually something that any one person in the CSM is willing to step forward and be a champion for, if no one is willing to address FW as a seperate area to fix worthy of its own discussion, than show us that respect at least so we can all stop wasting our time.

Faction Warfare has NOTHING to do with wormholes. Why the two are included in the same topic list is beyond me. This is probably the most disheartening turn of events in the history of this movement to see iterations on FW. We're finally getting momentum from CCP on development, the CSM had asked me to make you a list, I did so, even more feedback supported that list, and the CSM promised to make it a summit talking point.

Yet here we are, a single word in the title of a thread, followed by a list of fixes to wormholes, leaving the players to once again grovel, beg, and plead, for even a simply acknowledgment that one member, just one, has taken time to read the community's feedback, which has been consistent for years now, and include player feedback in the list being brought to CSM.

I apologize for what I know is an angry tone, but really, its just sadness and frustration. I really had a lot of respect for the CSM, appreciate all the time that was taken to respond to my mails, but after all that work, to see Faction Warfare delegated to a word tacked onto a wormhole discussion, is simply unbelievable.

I just don't know what more to say than that.


I know, since I didn't say something like "my personal list", it is easy to see how you could have misunderstood that list as the definitive CSM list. Roll

Look, I'm terribly sorry that you feel that everyone is ignoring FW, but I hate to break it to you, most of EVE is ignoring FW. Like I said to you in EVE mail, we don't have anyone on the current CSM that participates in FW. If you want us to bring up your little issues, you need to tell us what they are, and having them all in one thread makes that easier.

I also think you aren't understanding what Trebor and I said to you. We didn't promise you that everything wrong with FW would be fixed, we asked you for a list of smaller issues, because we wanted to have a list to present to CCP. This doesn't mean CCP is going to fix everything wrong with FW in the next patch (or even ever). This summit topic was a CCP requested topic, not a CSM requested topic.

As far as I can tell, there are far fewer FW folks than people that are living in w-space. Of course, FW needs a lot more work to be fixed, where w-space is mostly in good shape.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#39 - 2011-11-26 03:13:20 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:

This is a direct result of years of neglect like this. We were not always a minority activity, its become that way because the fans have mostly given up because they've shared their feedback time and time again only to be ignored.


I agree that Faction Warfare could be so much better, but as it is despite being a gamer that played in Lore/RP groups in games like Shadowbane and Darkfall I have never had interest in participating in Faction War in EVE as implemented. Nothing that happens in FW has much of an impact on the game world outside of those that signed up for it, and even then it's minimal. It's just another themepark ride, devoid of story, sandbox, and meaningful consequences to the world at large.

Perhaps with some fixes it will appeal to Hans and others more, but personally I think it needs a complete overhaul. Hans is right though it's hardly surprising that something long neglected by CCP garners little participation from the playerbase
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#40 - 2011-11-26 03:16:11 UTC
Two step wrote:

Look, I'm terribly sorry that you feel that everyone is ignoring FW, but I hate to break it to you, most of EVE is ignoring FW. Like I said to you in EVE mail, we don't have anyone on the current CSM that participates in FW. If you want us to bring up your little issues, you need to tell us what they are, and having them all in one thread makes that easier.

I also think you aren't understanding what Trebor and I said to you. We didn't promise you that everything wrong with FW would be fixed, we asked you for a list of smaller issues, because we wanted to have a list to present to CCP. This doesn't mean CCP is going to fix everything wrong with FW in the next patch (or even ever). This summit topic was a CCP requested topic, not a CSM requested topic.

As far as I can tell, there are far fewer FW folks than people that are living in w-space. Of course, FW needs a lot more work to be fixed, where w-space is mostly in good shape.


Thank you for your response, and rest assured I don't have any grandiose expectations about having everything fixed. I'm certainly not naive enough to think that we can just ask and it will be given. Also, I'm not naive enough to think that we represent the majority of EvE players. I've said that before. My case has always been that improving FW has implications beyond just FW, and I was hoping that the CSM could think beyond the one niche community and imagine the possibility that a thriving FW system could provide the type of small-scale combat that players across the game have been asking for, and revitalize lowsec, which has as many issues as nullsec does in terms of broken mechanics and stale activity.

I also was never under the impression that you PROMISED it to be fixed either. What I am reacting to, is that you asked for the list of small fixes to be condensed into one thread, which has been done. I guess the misunderstanding here is that by asking in this thread once again to see a list of little fixes, that I interpreted this to mean you hadn't seen the list that has already been compiled.

And you're right, you said personal list of fixes, I'm sorry for questioning something that should have been more obvious. I was a little flustered, only because there's only so many times you can asked to provide a list of fixes, than provide them, than asked to provide them again. I will go back and edit my previous post for fairness to your personal list, I apologize for jumping the gun.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary