| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (19)

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 1:37PM DrewIW said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Delete all supercapitals. Make jump-bridges limited to alliance members only.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 4:52PM smg77 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@DrewIW

That would just increase the number of jump bridges as each alliance would then start plopping them down. Jump bridges are fine the way they are. CCP is looking for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 1:53PM smg77 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
The CSM is right on when it comes to Incarna. CCP has yet to provide an example of what "walking in stations" will add to the game. It's going to end up being a massive amount of development time for no payoff. They either need to describe what Incarna means or scrap the entire retarded idea.

The CSM was retarded, though, by not speaking against the ridiculous idea of removing jump bridges. A seemingly large group of stupid people have latched on to the idea that if jump bridges are removed that small gang pvp will flourish in nullsec. I don't know why people accept that at face value...people who avoid getting ganked by station camps by using bridges now will just blob up and travel together to get where they are going. Hopefully CCP isn't terrible enough to actually implement such an idea.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 2:42PM Cwurle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I don't like the tone of that CSM and the answers are fucking retarded.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 3:33PM Xilmar said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
yeah 0.0 will remain dominated by large alliances. That's really not that much to do with gameplay, but more to do with human nature. A group of 100 people generally feel safer than 10 people. The only categorical way to counter this is to change the rules in 0.0, eventually making it less free, something that doesn't sound right in eve.

And - internetz for Massively for even mentioning about small entities and 0.0. CCP might not know and the CSM really doesn't know how open 0.0 is to small or very small entities. Not to mention the difficulty rises through the roof if said entity has other objectives besides pvp all day every day in this very vast and complex game.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 3:26PM Lateris said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
For me I get the vibe the CSM is against walking in stations.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 4:54PM smg77 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Lateris

Anybody who enjoys the game right now should be against Incarna. CCP is wasting time with it and with their ridiculous console-only shooter while bugs pile up in Eve.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 6:58PM GaaaaaH said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@smg77 The shooter is called Dust and Incarna is the Walking in Stations thing
Reply

Posted: Jan 24th 2011 4:48PM Meissa Anunthiel said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Lateris We're not, we signed up for a flying in space game though, but we want to make sure InCarna is the best it can be so we can actually enjoy playing it too.

We're not pissed at CCP making InCarna, we're pissed at what we were and weren't shown about it.
Reply

Posted: Jan 24th 2011 7:44PM smg77 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@GaaaaaH

I'm aware of that. Both are a waste of time.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 4:10PM digitalat0m said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Every time I read one of these CSM interviews lately I think the CSM is playing a different game than I am.. I'm not sure where they are getting the lack of PvP in 0.0 from.. the giant evil blobs are going at it like crazy right now. as for the small gang pvp there seems to be lots of that in our area too, there are constant roaming gangs through our systems. not to mention people camping jump bridges.. why would you want to get rid of JB's when you want to encourage small scale pvp? it's pretty easy to setup a drag bubble on JB network and get all kinds of easy ganks.. ( thats what all the pirates want anyways ).

as for big alliances those are going to happen.. why? because it's effective.. I don't think those are going to go away no matter what they do. Many corps working as one is always going to be more effective at holding space than a single corp.

Walking in stations.. i'm Meh towards.. as long as i don't have to walk to various vendors in the market i'm cool with it.

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 4:41PM Dblade said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@digitalat0m I don't think it's just them. I think CCP is way too focused on "ships destroyed" as a sign of a healthy economy, and they also look at 0.0 and see a barren, empty place mostly used by botters.

Still, 0.0 is irrelevant outside of those big alliances. No one really cares about it, and WH space is a far better deal for everyone except the largest alliances.
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 4:59PM digitalat0m said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Dblade yeah ships destroyed isn't necessarily a good metric :) I don't see many ( or any ) botters out in our space but we might not be deep enough.

we're not a large alliance by any stretch but we seem to get along fine in 0.0 :) I'd love to see some improvements but I don't have any dazzling ideas of my own at the moment..
Reply

Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 10:58PM EdmundDante said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I'm glad to see more resources have been devoted to the "smaller" fixes that may not appear to big to the overall development plans of CCP but which players and the CSM have been able to successfully push forward after some effort. So I applaud all the people involved - both the volunteers of CSM who have committed so much of their time to a very good "computer game" and to devs and CCP management for not being so rigid in their thought to refuse to change course a bit.

I also agree that CSM and players do have reason to suspect the "usual" we'll come back to said feature "later" ie reiterate - due to problems in gameplay that become apparent almost immediately after deployment - considering CCPs not so good track record on not really reiterating on major new features. But again, it appears CCP is wanting to move in this direction - and did reiterate on PI with improvement etc. and one would hope this would be more of a priority in the future development cycles. Particularly if players enjoy a given feature of Eve - such as Faction Warfare, and would like to have that feature grow instead of remain stagnant for years.

Incarna is a lot on the table - considering how much development resources have been assigned to the project (at least from what I've read here on Massively and elsewhere). Since CCP is keeping its cards on Incarna close to their chest - on exactly what the gameplay will involve - it is understandable that many players and CSM would be pretty apprehensive of what Incarna will entail - and whether it was worth the sacrifice and commitment of a lot of devs - especially considering there are so many other ways that have been pointed out that Eve could potentially grow gameplay wise.

However - in my opinion, Eve is remarkable MMO despite many of its well known weaknesses. Today 63+ thousand concurrent players were online in the same game space - quite an accomplishment IMO. Along with a real life market and manufacturing - and some of the best PvP in MMO game space (my opinion) . The visuals and space environment is probably the best available right now and the game keeps veterans coming and noobs signing up for the first time.

So CCP clearly has done some things right and should be given credit for this success of a computer game so far. And perhaps should be given more "wiggle" room on Incarna. Of course they know those of us who have acclimated ourselves to strictly spaceships will not want it ruined by some makeshift avatar mechanics in stations etc. Why wouldn't CCP have thought of that? So - I'm a bit optimistic that the changes for Incarna will likely be positive - and I'm also optimistic that given the remarkable work of this latest CSM - that CCP has changed course and will be reiterating more on those features most of us have come to really enjoy in Eve. Polish is just not polish - polish is really the heart of a good computer game - and is what does bring the greatest enjoyment IMO.



Posted: Jan 23rd 2011 11:34PM Krelian said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@EdmundDante

Extremely well said !
Reply

Posted: Jan 24th 2011 12:11AM godlyhalo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think both CCP and the CSM really should look at the reason why large alliances were formed in the first place. Would you rather have 1000 "people" (a lot of people can be alts / carebear's who don't do anything) available to fight at any given time, or have 25,000 people from multiple alliances? From what I have seen as part of the NC / clusterfuck, out of actual alliance numbers, only 5-15% actually show up for major ops. Even if an alliance has 2000 "members" you may only have 100-200 show up for a crucial op.

There are a few reasons why these numbers are like this. First off, people have lives. Second, there are a lot of EU / US timezone players, so if something is set to come out of reinforced for EU prime time, then there will obviously be less US players available.

Reasons for coalitions / very large alliances forming is because you need numbers in EVE to win wars. Good example of this is Pandemic Legion, they may be some of the best pvper's in EVE, but they can't hold sov for shit because they simply don't have the numbers to stand against 1000 man fleets of the NC. You can win the majority of battles in EVE, and yet still loose a war.

Personally, I don't think there will ever be a time where large numbers of people are not required to hold space. 25,000 "people" defending an area of space will always be safer than 2,000 "people". Besides, how is an ingame mechanic going to break up multi-alliance ties which have gone back months / years? Are you simply going to tell TEST, goons, WI, or anyone else to leave the NC just because you want smaller warfare? Good luck with that one.

Posted: Jan 24th 2011 11:31AM Lateris said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I disagree with you on Incarna. I also disagree with you on the issues of bugs. I do agree with you on the console because I feel it should also be developed for the PC, Mac, and Linux.

Posted: Jan 25th 2011 5:26PM DrOoo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Regarding the "What does Incarna bring to the game" topic I think CCP has to create a whole new set of activities that revolve around the Incarna concept. I loved the idea of having casino like establishment in stations. That is a good place to start, then move on to character customization options that require you to be outside of the ship like clothe swaps and you can start building around that. Everything that you can already do in EVE should still be doable exactly how it's done right now, just give me more stuff to do that we haven't seen before that require me to be on my avatar and it will work just fine.

Now when it comes to 0.0 warfare the problem is not the actual encounters but how trivial it is to try and do something without a super-cap fleet. Mobility is a huge problem factor for this since intel gets downplayed since you can just react instead of prevent. The larger the area the harder it should be to defend but the retarded mobility provided by super-caps and bridges means everyone can be anywhere in a matter of minutes that means that it takes roughly the same preparation to defend a system 10 jumps away as one 20 jumps away which takes a lor of strategical defense and offense options off the table, in turn not inspiring people to try different angles and strategies besides different fleet compositions. This is to become more of an issue the longer the game is live since more cap pilots are being trained every day.

I am very positive about EVE's future thou, simply because it is such an open ended game were anything that CCP wants to do will be welcomed as long as it doesn't interfere with the current gameplay and that is something they are being very careful about.

Posted: Feb 1st 2011 5:43PM bluntpencil said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm looking forward to Incarna, personally I think in 0.0 large corps can create little villages using jump bridges. Which means it doesn't have the feel of a frontier. If they made it logistically more challenging to camp up in 0.0 it may alter the dynamic a little.


Featured Stories

Massively's MMO guide to Halloween 2014

Posted on Oct 30th 2014 11:00AM

The Daily Grind: Do you defend your favorite MMO?

Posted on Oct 30th 2014 8:00AM

The Stream Team: Pumpkin carving in Landmark

Posted on Oct 29th 2014 8:00PM

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW