I’ll give you credit for showing up here, and at the same time I am somewhat surprised that no one else from CSM appears to be doing the same.
Nullification on shuttles was a solid proposal by itself, as you say this went far beyond, and I would add not thought of well enough. Turning nullification upside down is huge, and if you say it all started a few weeks ago it’s little surprise that the result is clumsy as it looks.
Beatings will continue until destruction improves.
1 Like
Oh right, fair point. (HA!)
my impel is useless ??? you have made this ship pointless.
1 Like
Yep, thats why they should’ve been deleted altogether.
1 Like
Are you honestly going to argue that bots didn’t have enough time before this change to dock up? Because if you think that’s true, that speaks volumes.
I’m not even a middle manager. I’m a player representative. As for the contention that the player base will shrink because of these changes, that’s unlikely and CCP doesn’t respond to those kinds of threats anyway. The bumping changes were a massive nerf to highsec ganking, and I don’t think there needs to be anything else done.
I’m working on it. I hope we can get them to add another high slot so there’s no issue.
Yes.
Don’t be surprised. Mike A and I are the only ones really active here.
And, to be clear, we’ve been talking about nullification issues with CCP for a long time. At least since CSM 13, when we were able to get them to pull it off the Claws and then other combat interceptors. But I have been consistent in what I wanted to see, and this patch went far beyond that.
1 Like
i have alot of issues with this change not so much from the passive to active module but the fact that im only allowed one module. this is inherintly unballanced because someone running a disrupter and a scram is a gonna win against you every time now instead of you being able to get away cause you built your ship to be able to get outta those sticky situations. if your gonna do something like this then you basicly allowing the pvp players to win overall and screw everyone else
@CCP_Dopamine Clearly this change has not been fully thought out, how are luxury yacht supposed to fit this module in the high slot when it is already occupied by a covert ops cloak?
and sometimes 2 people.
m
3 Likes
Nice )) wery wery nice
2 Likes
Brisc, I appreciate you answering my original questions after first saying that you couldn’t. Your posts offer a clearer insight to both the development by CCP and the history of the issues with the CSM. I thought that the CSM were free to offer their personal opinions on already ingame/deployed features, as well as discuss their roles (If any) in current gameplay. Since you and Mike appear to be the only responsive members of the CSM, those players outside of big bloc entities rely on your communications to better understand what is going on. Have the ground rules for CSM/public communication changed?
Now they have even more time, thats the point, this doesn’t make it harder to bot, it makes it easier and safer, because now there is even less chance that a bot might not be able to warp in time, and all of us can agree that is a bad thing
1 Like
It doesn’t change a damn thing, I find a bot warp to his site log offski wait 10min log back in land on grid with the bot and its already warping out. It’s the fastest way posible to catch something and the fact that you appear in local + a small warp is enough for a bot to get out.
1 Like
Another update and another confirmation that it will be better if my money stays in my bank account or I spend it on anything else than on EVE Online. Sorry CCP, you continue to behave irresponsibly and I have no intention of supporting this game in the state it is in with your decisions.
4 Likes
Sure, because you wanted nullification on anything not shuttle being removed. This is not what CCP did, and not what people outside nullblocs want. But with your constant whining about nullification and with your bloc bias you are to some extend responsible for this mess.
2 Likes
I am here as well. Reading and commenting where I may. and yes, talking to ccp when I see something I think needs hilighting with them. But please do remember WHICH CSM people Do talk to you. There is an election coming.
m
3 Likes
This is not correct. I did not want any changes to any other ships, including T3Cs. I wanted no guns on interceptors - tackle was fine - and nullification on shuttles. That’s all I ever asked for.
But hey, if you want to blame me for “this mess” feel free. I’ve been consistent in what I’ve advocated for and what I haven’t, and I’ve worked hard since this was rolled out to get things changed and fixed as players have brought quality feedback. I’m going to keep doing that, regardless of whether you or anybody else thinks this is my fault in the first place.
2 Likes
Why is the ‘Restrained Interdiction Nullifier’ called Restrained and not Enduring?
The meta ‘restrained’ is consistently used for modules with less drawbacks, which would suggest lower targeting range penalties or scan res penalties.
The module ingame has a lower activation cost compared to alternatives, which players would usually see for meta modules of the ‘enduring’ type.
Please fix this inconsistency, CCP.
5 Likes
Blockquote
Скоро выборы.
Хмм … Вы настаивали на изменениях и они наступили.
Нам изменения не нравятся ни по форме ни по содержанию .
Какие основания Вас даже воспринимать как делегатов ?
Вы не оправдали даже самые скромные ожидания.
Blockquote
Elections are coming soon.
Hmm … you insisted on change and it came.
We do not like the changes either in form or in content.
What are the reasons to even perceive you as delegates?
You have not met even the most modest expectations.
1 Like
Usual half arsed attempt of a patch. Update your shuttle stats/attributes and like reported on sisi, the cooldown timer on the nullification module breaks when you jump systems