No it was not meant to be safe , every time you leave dock its dangerous but when people actually took time to make things safer some people got upset.
1 Like
What opportunities would those be exactly?
Who is it we can undock on and battle?
Do we take a Super fleet with subcap support - How many should we take, 1,000 - 3,000 maybe 100 would be enough.
Oh wait, all the groups capable of âundocking and having battlesâ - WONâT.
Since the blackout began the one thing Iâve noticed overall is - Most major groups who hold space are concentrating on minding/guarding their own space. This doesnât leave a lot of room for any kind of âdecentâ (lets drive them out of their space - lets kill their super fleet) kind of fights. Which is exactly what the game needs.
We need a new Sov system, that is not so easy to manipulate and is nothing but a full on grind fest
We need a reason to go out and fight - Why fight someone over space when it has nothing your own space doesnât have. Honestly who wants to risk taking more space during changes that are slated to make it harder to hold space?
We need CCP to stop trying to âforceâ non sandbox content on to the worlds oldest established sandbox
We need CCP to talk to (and listen to) players from nulsec who donât have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo
We need CCP to stop âpretendingâ they know what they are doing when it comes to nulsec
1 Like
How would you go about groups using out of game comms to co-ordinate and work together.
We have at times worked with traditional enemies because we had a common enemy. There was no formal âallianceâ, we just didnât shoot each other for a time and used a shared TS/Mumble.
CCP canât, with game mechanics, stop players and groups âco-operatingâ especially when all it really takes is, Get on comms - Form fleet - if itâs purple, donât shoot it.
Renting and Renters is an age old problem. CCP would need to fix sov first to even begin to look at doing anything with game mechanics relating to renter alliances. Not likely to happen in my lifetime.,.
1 Like
In some cases they should be supported for this type of behavior, and in others its a failure on the development teams part for facilitating them with the content, and options needed to do it.
Example of this is founded above when i mentioned âsensor towersâ concept. If upwell structures could apply an upgrade that would allow an ! to show up on the map and when hovering over it said:
Fleet (orange spice) - 132 members
Fleet (apple spice) - 242 members
and you were able to see this ! which you can scroll over for the above details, what system they are in, and have it update in real time, youâd invalidate spying largely.
Coalitions take place out of game because its mechanically possible in game to make them work. There are ways to invalidate them from existing in the game with mechanical changes to the diplomacy and overview system.
It is possible to some how phase, or prevent people from locking on ships that are engaged in a war for example, requiring you to be part of that war to interact wiht them. Wars could also be required to challenge null sov. A great many of options are here that can be created to make it so that you invalidate this type of behavior. its up to the development team to investigate what is best for the game and implement it.
At some point when its a problem, players will generally stop doing it.
They should encourage it. Its beneficial for the health of the game. They should designed mechanical systems via the diplomacy to make it possible. Its good, it just need to become something controlled.
[quote=âNaari_Naarian, post:1782, topic:176410â]
Coalitions take place out of game because its mechanically possible in game to make them work. There are ways to invalidate them from existing in the game with mechanical changes to the diplomacy and overview system.
[/quote] Wouldnât work, you donât have to be blue to someone to have them in a fleet with you. Same as you donât need to have a declared war to fight another group.
[quote=âNaari_Naarian, post:1782, topic:176410â]
It is possible to some how phase, or prevent people from locking on ships that are engaged in a war for example, requiring you to be part of that war to interact wiht them.
[/quote] So you want CCP to totally rewrite the war dec system - How do you see this affecting roaming gangs who want to fight nul entities ?
Firstly, as per your suggestion - All fleet members would need to be in the same corp or alliance (kills off many roaming gangs). Second, you would need to have a declared war against whoever you want to fight - So a roaming gang would first have to send war to anybody they are likely to encounter on a roam or risk being unable to fight them due to game mechanics.
[quote=âNaari_Naarian, post:1782, topic:176410â]
At some point when its a problem, players will generally stop doing it.
[/quote] This is Eve, history shows players will ALWAYS find a way to do what they want to do, regardless of what mechanics surround said activity.
[quote=âNaari_Naarian, post:1782, topic:176410â]
They should encourage it. Its beneficial for the health of the game. They should designed mechanical systems via the diplomacy to make it possible. Its good, it just need to become something controlled.
[/quote] Honestly in my experience, renter alliances are bot ridden plagues - The game would be far better off without them.
If the sov system worked as intended there should be no need for renters.
Finally - Exactly how much âcontrolâ over how WE use the sandbox would you give to CCP?
So every week almost 16k people pretty much decide the Eve sucks⌠and thatâs okay?
1 Like
Entitled? Remove all insurance and then see who starts complaining about golden milk bottles being removed.
2 Likes
Iâve been hot dropped in null, never in a WH. Let me know when null catches up.
Hillmarâs been in WH space doing PI, why do you think the PI interface got an update for the first time in years? Its because Hilmarr thinks its âcoolâ, whatâs why any of this stuff is happening. His gameplay is becoming our gameplay, wether we like it or not.
2 Likes
ROFL, if that is anything close to true - EVE isnât dieing - Itâs already dead.
Many of the problems we have now in game are entirely down to Devs own experiences (or lack thereof) in game.
Falcons little ill thought out speech about Eve being harsh and horrible if he had his way - Is the exact reason (thankfully) He is not a Developer.
He clearly does not understand the game or for that matter those who play it and why.
I would never want to play ANY game that is designed around being "harsh and horribleâ.,.
2 Likes
Hasnât been true for at least 10 years
Neither the drifter assault nor the Blackout were particularly âinnovativeâ. The Drifters were a scripted âspawn fleets in X systemsâ either a dev or GM needed to push button on every morning (which is why there was demonstrably a wave in EUTZ and a wave in USTZ, then nothing in AU cuz nobody was on-duty, and why it completely vanished over the weekend) with a previously-demonstrated fleet composition and AI (in Semiki in February) that pretty much meant âok, gun the astra. Fire bombs at the fleetâs anchor ship. Once youâve got 4 bombs in flight, web it. -1 Drifter fleetâ.
And the Blackout was literally âflip a switch weâve been talking about flipping for 15 years and then someâ. The Blackoutâs got potential, but itâs not particularly âinnovativeâ. (Also, yes, I have the entire series + Serenity. Nothing this summer has been anything like that.)
For all you know, theyâve had those skills. Theyâve done that play style. And they got bored with it. Honestly, the small gang stuff in EVE? Itâs boring AF. Itâs meaningless. And whatâs the payoff, really? An adrenaline spike? Seriously? If you get jazzed by beating on the little kid in the helmet (which, in PvP terms, is what a mining or ratting ship is), I dunno, I donât think youâve got a right to call anyone else âweakâ. If youâre farming tears, and that isnât something youâve grown out of inside of a few years⌠maybe try moving past being twelve?
Seriously. That crapâs dull. Itâs crap I was doing on MUDs in 1990. Gimme the stuff no-where else gives you. The fights no other game in the world offers, and the strategic and espionage maneuverings nothing else online can match.
Star Citizen has raised no money on the strength of their central message.
Star Citizen has raised an obscene amount of money on the strength of âCHRIS ROBERTS IS MAKING A SPACE GAMEâ. Thatâs it. Hell, theyâve literally raked in more than 200 million based almost entirely on âgive us another 50 mil, and weâll give you ANOTHER PIECE OF CONCEPT ART YOU CAN DOWNLOAD!!â
You could get that on DeviantArt for free. And itâd be better than the stuff CIGâs doing.
Their funding is 100% on the Chris Roberts name and (now) sunk-cost fallacies.
We need a balance of power that doesnât make getting sov depend on having things you can only get by having sov. We need risking everything and losing to not be an unrecoverable proposition. We need the ability to fight a no-holds-barred war that wonât utterly destroy one side or the otherâs ability to fight the next war in 18 months.
We need to fix the broke-ass crap that is supercapitals, and at this point, that probably means just killing them all.
1 Like
how long wil this stil on this black out
you can be sitting in WH that is saver then nulsec know
Todayâs experiment with local chat, as it affects Null, going âbeyond the blackoutâ has been fascinating. What if local actively lied to players, as it has been doing? (Allegedly due to a problem with the chat servers.) Names randomly popping up, randomly persisting despite pilots leaving the system, and/or disappearing at random time intervals. True chaos!
1 Like
Sounds a bit like instancing to me
You have to be kidding, blackout is not working. They can not even program a silly chat program to do as they whish. In nullsec pilots are showing in local chat again. Can I have some compensation please for ruined gametime?
Being hot dropped in Null was my introduction to PvP. I does not match the permanent paranoia of WH space.
The full dotlan statistics also show that pod kills and jumps went down in null sec. Given the triglavian npcs attacks during that period, that increase in ship kills is probably PVE ships and not pvp kills.
Your hypothesis is that bearing went up in null during this period? In fact, it went so far up that the bearing losses outweighed the drop of major wars preceding Blackout, and the claimed lower PvP activity? This does not strike me as a very reasonable stance at this point, Iâm afraid. Less pod deaths doesnât really indicate much but less use of bubbles, and could even be part of the wars cooling down since the large-scale fights are often where people even desire the pod death for a quick reship.
Triglobytes derpinâ around does not strike me as even remotely capable of introducing those kinds of numbers. It just relies too heavily on unlikely behaviour patterns from bears, as well as disregarding the likelihood of PvPers taking advantage of Blackout while it lasts.
You made it to null? My first hot-drop-upon was in low sec. Four supers for a 5 man battlecruiser gang.
1 Like
Mine was a carrier on my battleship after I attacked another battleship. I did not last long.
@Arrendis It seems like youâre in the wrong game mate, You talk as if there is absolutely nothing you like about Eve. I think you should quit and stop posting.
If it has been talked about for 15 years then why are so many shocked to the extent they are quitting the game?
I think the complainers should just give CCP a break they are trying to make Eve interesting at least. The dynamics of local being turned off are interesting and should be explored.
1 Like