EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2008-09-27 22:50
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-09 12:57
  • Number of Posts: 212
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 349

Kaeda Maxwell

Security Status 1.1
  • Screaming Hayabusa Member since
  • Neo-Bushido Movement Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Nashh Kadavr for CSM XI -evesports, live events, Lowsec, NPSI in Council of Stellar Management

    Quote:

    Faction Warfare plexes need to be changed - PLEXes need to force people to bring bigger ships.


    Yeah, no.

  • Notice: Investgation and Prize Item Freeze for Teams in ATXIII in EVE Communication Center

    Mr Rive wrote:
    The people who participate in the AT follow the rules set out by CCP because we want an esport of our own. CCP get out of this exposure, enjoyment (i hope) and a feeling of cooperation with the players.

    Breaking those rules doesn't violate the EULA, but it sets out to endanger something awesome. Hydra set out to play the game with CCP we all play between ourselves, that of out metaing our opponents. CCP is not our opponent. That's a line we as participants in the tournament cannot cross if the tournament is to have any validity as an esport.

    If CCP can find objective proof of this in action in one or more teams in the AT, then it invalidates not only the prizes given out to the cheaters, but it invalidates any match they played throughout the tournament. There are a lot of teams who might have placed highly if it wasn't for their cheating, and they need to be compensated in some way.

    IF the allegations are true, the captains of the teams need to be punished heavily. A lot of the pilots in the teams had an idea of what was going on (i mean hell everyone else did) but they were not the ones who tried to cheat the system. This kind of behaviour will continue if you dont set a very firm example of these pilots.


    They haven't been found guilty yet. Jumping the gun much?

  • Sounding board for fleet warps in w space in EVE Gameplay Center

    corbexx wrote:
    I've sorted a sounding board for people to come and discuss fleet warp changes with CCP Larrikin.

    It will be on Wednesday the 17th 18.00 eve time. It will be on ts and I'll mail password to people the afternoon its on.

    So if you want to come and raise concerns please post on the thread.


    I'd like to be present.

  • [AEGIS] Fleet Warp Changes - Please see devblog! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    So my main concern here is that this is a stealth buff to off grid boosters (OGB).

    Many tech 3 off grid boosters are fitted both to be extremely hard to scan down and have a 100mn afterburner to burn around on the grid. Furthermore they often sit in deep safes (long warps).

    Currently the best way to kill an OGB is to scan it down (which needs to be done fast or they cloak) fleet warp a lachesis or a tackle bomber to them (dscan invisibility).

    After this change in order to kill a OGB you'll need to put a cloaky scout on grid with the OGB so you can warp to that. This causes a few issues, often OGB's are only decloaked for a limited amount of time, so the extra delay reduces the chances of catching it. Furthermore if it's in a deepsafe and burning with a 100mn 2 long warps instead of one makes it highly likely that it will now be out of tackle range completely by the time you get there.

    Fitting tackle to the prober isn't that realistic a solution either since you need highly specialized fits to even be able to scan most tech 3 OGB's down in the first place. And many of the command ship variants that are hard to probe also carry a flight of ECM drones which puts further restraints on the fits of viable tackle ship.

    So I worry that this change makes a class of ships that is already incredibly hard to kill even harder to kill.

    Having corp bookmarks update instantaneously might be a viable work around, that way you still remove the automation but at least it doesn't hurt things like OGB hunting then.

  • Carnyx release - General feedback in EVE Information Center

    Natya Mebelle wrote:
    Kaeda Maxwell wrote:
    Basically screen real estate in EVE is at a premium. So any space I can win anywhere is welcome making everything smaller is a good way to gain space. If there was a 75% scaling option I'd use that too :)

    Question:

    Would you like it if you could scale the overview separately from the rest of the UI ?


    Yes.

    I'd also like to be able to colour code it and colour code the dscanner read out :)
    It would also help immensely if the chat windows could be border-less (so that only the actual text in would take up space) and some other other solution to displaying who's in them could be found.

  • Carnyx release - General feedback in EVE Information Center

    CCP Surge wrote:

    I'm also curious to hear more from, and maybe wasn't aware of how many users played with a 90% downscaled UI (as opposed to scaling up for accessibility reasons.) What are your reasons for doing so?


    Basically screen real estate in EVE is at a premium. So any space I can win anywhere is welcome making everything smaller is a good way to gain space. If there was a 75% scaling option I'd use that too :)

    Why is screen space so valuable, well, especially in PvP with smaller numbers manually piloting the ship is vastly superior to using keep at range or orbit. Partly because both those options are horribly slow to respond to changes and partly because manual flying gives you far better control over stuff like transversal and the ability to respond to changes in transversal/speed of your opponent much faster by anticipating why that change is happening.

    One of the inherent handicaps about manual piloting though is that it needs a lot of swapping between how much you're zoomed in it's very hard to accurately place the double clicks required for precise manual piloting when you're zoomed out very far, but at the same time you need to regularly switch to zooming out quite far to be able to keep track of where things are on the grid in relation to you.
    Because the only other method of keeping track of things around you when zoomed in (which will frequently occur because of what I outlined above) is the overview and to some extend currently locked targets and the dscanner read out most manual piloting PvP'ers have above average sized Overviews and Dscanners. Even with 90% scaling my overview + dscanner take up about at least quarter of my available screen space. And then my locked targets and the 'capwheel' take up space too ofc, add a fleet chat window, maybe a drone window and relevant fleet screens and suddenly half your screen is covered in windows.
    And this competes with my need to be able to see the brackets of things around me in space and my need to be able to frequently zoom in to pilot. When I'm zoomed out far enough that I can see what's around me I can't pilot properly and when I'm zoomed in far enough that I can pilot properly I can't see enough of what is going on around me on the grids.
    Leading to a desire to make everything as small as I can possibly make it, making 90% UI scaling very attractive over 100%.

    If you have anymore questions I'd be happy to clarify further :)

  • Carnyx release - General feedback in EVE Information Center

    New icons are really hard to make out at 90% UI scaling.

  • [June] [Updated] Module Tiericide - Afterburners & Microwarpdrives in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Any chance you could explain to us the reasoning behind buffing T2 mods speed instead of nerfing the tier beneath it?

    Things have already gotten really fast in EVE first after the T1 cruiser buff and more recently with propulsion mode on T3D's.

    The reason people currently often fit named MWD's is because they have no meaningful penalty compared to T2. I know developers don't like 'nerfing' stuff but I think it would genuinely be better to nerf the lower ends instead of buffing the higher ends in this case to create meaningful choice.

    Even more speed seems like a bad idea for the overall health of PvP gameplay atm. Brawling was pretty dead already in anything bigger then frigates in the small gang meta, it really doesn't need another kick in the proverbial nuts.

  • Sugar Kyle for CSM X in Council of Stellar Management

    Hardest working most dedicated woman I know, not even just in EVE.

    Absolutely worthy of your support.

    +1

  • Addressing the frigate wormholes.... in EVE Gameplay Center

    chris elliot wrote:
    They are terrible for the same reason faction warfare frigate garbage is. It's a narrow range of overpowered, uninteresting ships to fly, with boring ships to shoot at that no one really cares about except poor, risk adverse nerds who think it's "fun". I mean if it gets you your $15/m then whatever right, but people like the majority of us who post here don't play this game to run around in crappy frigates.


    Yeah. F* those people who have fun. Who wants to that? Sounds terrible.

  • [Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates! in EVE Technology and Research Center

    That basically removes my only real concerns I had with the previously announced changes.

    Thank you for listening to the feedback! And looking forward to the patch now!Lol

  • Prototype: Dojos in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Kaeda Maxwell wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Kaeda Maxwell wrote:


    To the slippery slope folks; This changes nothing the people that are primarily interested in this feature aren't in space for you to fight anyway.


    This do not matter. The possibility of non-consensual pvp ANYTIME in any space in new eden is a CORE principle. This idea violates that core principle.


    You can't un-consensually PvP me in EVE when I'm playing League, because there's nothing left in EVE for me to log in for.


    CCP should not spend a bunch of time creating content for people who don't really like what EVE is in the 1st place. It's not and should never be something the 'instant gratification crowd' (like LoL players).



    Exuse me? How do you know hat I like? I've been playing EVE longer then any other MMO, I've ever played and I've been playing MMO's since Ultima Online.

    EVE used to have content I enjoyed it still does. But it used to be you could log in and spend an hour in EVE and have few cool frigate fights in that time. Now when I log in I have to spend an extraordinate amount of time to get at any content I actually enjoy. Or I have to go through a massive amount of effort and multibox 3 accounts just to get a level playing field.
    And I have a limited amount of leisure time, it's not that I don't enjoy the EVE content when I do mange to get it, it is that the amount of time/effort required to get is completely out of kilter with the amount of enjoyable content I can get out of other games in the same amount of time. EVE doesn't exist in a vacuum.

  • Prototype: Dojos in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Kaeda Maxwell wrote:


    To the slippery slope folks; This changes nothing the people that are primarily interested in this feature aren't in space for you to fight anyway.


    This do not matter. The possibility of non-consensual pvp ANYTIME in any space in new eden is a CORE principle. This idea violates that core principle.


    You can't un-consensually PvP me in EVE when I'm playing League, because there's nothing left in EVE for me to log in for.

  • Prototype: Dojos in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Great! Can't wait to see this on TQ eventually.

    To the slippery slope folks; This changes nothing the people that are primarily interested in this feature aren't in space for you to fight anyway. You know what was the most novel thing about this years AT? That the people that won in actually fly on TQ in PvP regularly (something that hasn't been true of the of previous years winners for a few years they seem to mostly just play EVE for tournaments and that has been the case ever since AT9 pretty much).
    This is CCP potentially adding a feature that may stop many of us 1vs1 & esports types from simply walking away from EVE for games like LoL & DotA. We aren't the people you're hot dropping, we aren't the people you catch in gate camps. At best we're the guy killing your light tackle in a solo boat on TQ.
    I've been a member of the solo and frigate community for some years now and that community has only gotten narrower for years, CCP adding stuff that keep players in the game is a good thing, not a bad thing.

  • Dev blog: Coming in Hyperion on August 26th in EVE Information Center

    One minor concern :)

    100MN meta 4 MWD would go from 720 to 360GJ for comparison T2 AB burns 352GJ.

    Now obviously AB's are still scram immune, don't bloat your sig and have no innate cap penalty. And they already don't really get fitted to battleships anyway, but still you might want to also have a look at afterburners if you do this. Because I'd be very hard pressed to find a reason other then over sizing on cruisers to fit one now :)

  • [Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks in EVE Technology and Research Center

    For the Ishtar, have you considered increasing it's mass a little in addition to lowering its speed?

    While the sentries themselves are an issue much of the Ishtars issues are caused by the fact it burns around on the grid with impudence after deploying it's stationary weapons. If it had more trouble turning/accelerating and decelerating it might solve much of the problem. And it would create a bit of diversity with the relatively fast and nimble Vexor Navy.
    100mn fits that are now super popular for Ishtar PvE in 0.0 would also be come a little less amazing at what they do.

  • Restrict Watchlist in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Madbuster73 wrote:
    Kaeda Maxwell wrote:
    I have one serious gripe with this;

    Currently at least it's an equal intel playing field, small groups can just as easily watch list the Titans/Supers of large groups and thus know whether they are drawing response when they logon their own capital pilots. Or if said large groups have their stuff logged in to start with.

    In a system where you would need visual presence to confirm Titans/Supers being logged on you place the intel advantage firmly with the larger organisation because they have more people (and alts) to keep large networks of observers in place.

    I suspect that contrary to what you think your proposed change would accomplish it would actually increase the advantage of larger groups purely because they have more manpower for intel gathering.



    Actually not, since the larger groups have no idea when you log in and move your capital, they wont know where it is.
    Also if the larger alliances see the smaller log in and they log in theirs, the smaller alliances have no other option then to stand down. This standing down is what is making it boring.

    It would make a tremendous lot of work for the big alliances to observe everything, and the smaller alliances have more chance of getting in and out of a fight before the big alliances notice.



    We'll have to agree to disagree. Mostly because I think you severely underestimate the intel gathering capabilities of some of New Eden's larger entities.

    The amount of smaller entities which will deploy capitals with any regularity or effectiveness is small enough that it wouldn't be that hard to keep them under reasonably effective surveillance. And then I'm not even taking into account how many medium sized entities are riddled with spies and people with divided loyalties.

    Anyway, we'll just have to disagree I fear Big smile

  • Restrict Watchlist in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I have one serious gripe with this;

    Currently at least it's an equal intel playing field, small groups can just as easily watch list the Titans/Supers of large groups and thus know whether they are drawing response when they logon their own capital pilots. Or if said large groups have their stuff logged in to start with.

    In a system where you would need visual presence to confirm Titans/Supers being logged on you place the intel advantage firmly with the larger organisation because they have more people (and alts) to keep large networks of observers in place.

    I suspect that contrary to what you think your proposed change would accomplish it would actually increase the advantage of larger groups purely because they have more manpower for intel gathering.

  • Skill acquisition. Time for change? in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Ved Riru wrote:

    Then I don’t like that I have to wait for days or weeks to get some skills. It is too long. And if I have spent the remaps available for a year, then getting some skills takes even longer. Life goes on. I don’t have an infinite amount of days that I can spend waiting to be able to equip some tier two modules or squeeze a little bit more out of power grid or CPU enhancing skills so that I can fit ships properly the way Battleclinic tells me to.


    For the record most actually competitive players in this game avoid Battleclinic fits like the plague, they're notoriously atrocious.

  • The Black Dragon Fighting Society Welcomes New Pirates in EVE Corporations, Alliances and Organizations Center

    Laid back bunch of people.