All this ranting from this kid for the last 24 hours started when he replaced CCP’s stated goals with his own, and then getting mad when CCP’s changes don’t accomplish his own goal.
He’s somehow deluded himself that this change was only meant to target afk nullsec krabs. And literally cannot fathom a world where CCP intended to target more than that.
Which almost exclusively means null sec ratting. It’s not hard to read between the lines here, unless one is more interested in winning an internet argument that addressing the truth.
There is NO other drone based low attention pve gameplay in EVE other than null sec anom ratting, since CCP fixed the high sec infinite respawning cosmos sites.
There is this really intense ignorance about PVE going on in this thread (and the ESS one too) which to me is a major barrier in all these discussions. I don’t know why it’s controversial to prefer targeted improvements over blanket nerfs that hit unintended targets.
If CCP wants to kill low attention gameplay, they should make gameplay that needs you to pay attention to it, not take away a weapon system that has been useful across the board in dealing with npc EWAR use.
I know, crazy idea, right?
BUT IT IS NOT EXCLUSIVELY ONLY NULLSEC RATTING.
Crazy idea, right?
Stop replacing CCP’s stated goals with your own and then triggering yourself when the changes don’t accomplish your goals.
Machariel has 7 default max targets.
It has a free utility high slot, so you can slap an auto targetting unit II there and raise your max targets to 10.
I never did a COSMOS site, but I assume all those 60+ NPCs aren’t all frigates, right…?
Whats the big issue of having to actually think about what you are targetting, and spread your limited targetting slots inbetween bigger ships and smaller ships?
Doing Lvl4 missions, I target cruiser and frigates first of all, and kill cruisers with guns and frigates with drones.
By the time I’m focusing on battleships, most things, if not everything, are already dead, so I never run into issues about lacking targetting slots.
Maybe you should just switch to a different ship for doing COSMOS, if the machariel is suddenly so terrible at clearing the sites now?
Didn’t you read the angry comments about people being unable to run lvl4 missions AFK above?
People having different opinions about stuff doesn’t make either them or you ignorant.
You just have different opinions.
Just because it’s your opinion, doesn’t mean it’s right.
In CCP’s opinion, this change is good, and many people agree, but some also disagree.
So far, the only real opinion I’ve seen about this change being bad is regarding ECM, and I agree with that now! 
All other opinions on why the change is bad are lazy, stupid or unfounded , imo of course.
And here we go.
We can agree that the EWAR issue needs to be addressed.
There’s already a suggestion above(pressing F while selecting a target directly from your overview makes your drones target and attack it, without requiring the main ship to target it beforehand), and imo, it should help address the EWAR issue, and also offer an improvement to active drone gameplay.
The CSM already took that suggestion to CCP to see what they think about it.
Do you have any other suggestions on how this change could be better, or more well received?
If you do, post them for us to comment!
If you just want to complain about how bad it is, then you have to at least expect people to disagree with your opinions.
Case in point.
There are lots of non-cosmos sites like that. Any Prisoner retention ded site. Blood Raider Temple. Some of those hidden sites in Gallente high sec.
The point is that as long as their have been drones, they have had this semi-autonomous ability. CCP is taking that away rather than properly deal with a problem.
They have done it before (using a sledge hammer instead of a scalpel) and it’s simply bad game design. CCp is almost as bad at that as they are reusing content (which is why we just had that recent Drone standings issue, god forbid CCP make new NPCs rather than just recycling old stuff…this is why Ishtars are just big vexors btw).
At this point I’m just at the conclusion that EVE players deserve that kind of bad game design. You accept it without question, hell if you think it’s going to negatively effect something or someone you don’t like you accept and encourage it (just like those folks who were sure Dominion Sov was going to screw Goons…).
God forbid human developers try to find an efficient way to repurpose existing content in the EVE Online database so they don’t have to come up with new things each and everytime. How DARE they? We need to demand they make everything new from scratch!!
I cannot believe you’ve been bitching for 24 hours over the thought of having to spend maybe 35 seconds more locking a frigate only to turn around and suggest that there are “simpler” ways to solve the “problem”, which isn’t even the problem that CCP is looking at in the first place.
I’ve participated in EVERY ONE of CCPs discord PVE townhalls (the one’s hosted by Jin’Taan). I’ve said the exact same things there as here.
I’m not talking to CCP right now, I’m talking to you. I’m explaining why the thing you are supporting is a new example of old, bad thinking. It’s a way of doing things that may not be disastrous but that has failed and caused preventable problems in a game that is imo too fragile to make those kinds of mistakes.
CCP could really use an experience “PVE CZAR” game designer that understands the mindset of PVE centric development, because as it is now, it’s just PVPing DEVs throwing stuff at a wall.
I don’t have to have ever done any type of content to know that if there’s more smaller ships inside, maybe I should use a cruiser instead of a battleship for clearing it. 
35 seconds to lock a frigate in a game where for at least the last 13 years we didn’t have too, and all because CCP can’t figure out how to deal with AFK ratting myrms and ishtars.
I understand that you will never understand the issue, but that’s a personal failing I can’t help you with. I prefer it when CCP does smart things (like when they added NPC dreads of Havens and Sanctums, which screwed over botters and afkrs and gave the rest of us interesting targets to shoot) to the game I enjoy rather than repeating age old mistakes that they should have collectively learned from a decade ago.
I’m sorry if you don’t have any standards. Again, I don’t know why asking for good game design (that CCP is capable of doing because they have done so before, look at the Abyss) rather than blind nerfs is a bad thing.
Wow, a change to the game changes a thing. Crazy idea, right?
Can you?
Your answer to address the excessive isk faucet in nullsec by putting NPC dreads in each anomaly that can be farmed even more? That’s how you’re going to deal with afk myrms?
A cruiser… In a Blood Raider Temple? Maybe a T3C, but anything else will just die.
The point is that there is a lot of PVE ignorance, and yet people have opinions about what should happen with PVE. Why not learn about the issue more and THEN have an informed opinion?
PVE is a puzzle and this change isn’t going to end the ability to do it, it’s going to make it harder in cases where it doesn’t need to be harder for real players. Meanwhile, botters will have no problems and the afkers will just have to push a single button every 5 minutes while watching netflix.
In other words, it will probably have the opposite of the intended effect.
I know nothing I type here is going to change what CCP does (the townhalls didn’t, the existence of the CSM doesn’t). But damn it, EVE posters could be smarter about these issues so we could at least speak with one voice when we see mistakes coming.
CCP knows how. NPC dreads are ONE EXAMPLE. The anti-drone towers in Abyssal sites. Gating content to keep carriers and supers out (like with the ESS) which is the main isk spew.
Hell, they can simply say “auto drone aggro on npcs doesn’t work in null sec” (like how you can’t launch a bubble or a bomb in low sec, you can’t use fighters in an 0.4 or above system, can’t use a jump drive to jump in to high sec etc etc) and be done.
But no, what we get is an across the board nerf ala skynet. It’s a mistake and I don’t know why you can’t see that.
I know CCP’s history.
There’s no need to try and lecture me on it to make you feel smarter and show that your opinion is worth more than others’.
Do you know what I thought of skill injectors?
I thought they would destroy the game, and servers would either shut down in a year or two due to rampant bot abuse, or new servers would be opened to give players a “fresh start”, so I quit when they were introduced.
Seeing an EVE Echoes ad, I got curious and came to check the situation, and was amazed to see that EVE still existed, and that my predictions weren’t that accurate back then.
I have now finished injecting my alt to be efficient in running level4 missions, and do agree that skill injectors offer a nice “catch up mechanic” for people returning, which was one of the positive feedback for injectors back then.
I now also have my own opinion on this current subject, so there’s no need to keep telling me my opinion is wrong because of CCP’s history.
I have taken a look at CCP’s roadmap for future changes, and so far, they have followed it pretty well.
The dynamic systems and content that people are requesting is the last step in that roadmap, because CCP said that to develop new content, they must first have a good solid view on what the difficulty and reward for said new content should be when the economy reaches the healthy scale of risk/effort/reward they want.
You speak as if the current CCP didn’t develop Abyssal Filaments.
Blood Raider Temple Complex
https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Blood_Raider_Temple_Complex
There’s 27 Battleships, and 15 frigates inside…
Why not read whole comments before calling people ignorant, and coming out as one yourself?
They did. And then promptly it seems they have forgotten. CCP as adamant about how they would take what they learned in the abyss and apply it elsewhere. Maybe they still will, but I honestly thought they were out of the “blanket nerf/invite unforeseen consequences” business.
The Triglavian Rouge Drone standings fiasco and now this prove that they are still very much in that business. It’s like watching a professional sports team make bush league mistakes.
In the 1st part yea. And neuting towers, and hard to kill HACs.
It’s been useful to let the drones fly free. Now that won’t be an option. No big deal MJDs and Cap batteries (that I already bring anyways) exist.
But it’s a step backwards, CCP should ADD to the pve experience, not take from it.
There’s also hard to kills HACs in some lvl4 missions.
Letting my drones free in those missions usually ends in them attacking those HACs, and never managing to build any damage beyound the HAC’s regen, all while they could have been useful killing frigates, destroyers or normal cruisers.
That’s why I never let my drones loose, besides running the risk of killing a trigger early, or getting unecessary aggro from another group.
I pull the drones in and launch again, light drones like to fight smaller npcs but will attack bigger ones if that’s the one that aggros you first. In bigger sites the frigs tend to aggro you before anything else so it’s not a big deal.
Like I said, not a big deal. MJD up, slaughter frigates as they approach, MJD back down and kill the big stuff. Losing drone aggro on npcs is not the end of the world, it’s just dumb when what CCP says it wants is to get rid of low attention isk making.
Thus the saying “don’t use a sledge hammer where a scalpel will suffice”. CCP has a loonnng history of doing that, and it’s always a mistake.
Yup and we do, we do.
But given the choice to rewrite all the Cosmos missions or shift the AI of drones . . . which button do you expect anyone to reach for?
Hell, yes I would like to see more interesting and dynamic missions, ones that make you sweat or get the shakes. For me the abyss fulfills that better than any other PvE in Eve because it is not (for me) predictable nor is winning a sure thing.
But some folks want predictable, constant, reliable. Eve has a lot of players and a lot of play styles. This change hit one of the styles but not all of them.
m