EVE, she is a changing. The next year should see some dramatic adjustments to ships and the concept of tiers. With that in mind I figured why not take some time to list what I'd like to see happen once the balancing hits cruisers, BC's and BS's. I'm starting off with Tech 1 cruisers and I'll work my way up from there. Also, I'm not discussing Amarr ships as I won't fly anything Amarr so I don't feel qualified to accurately assess them.
Cruisers- The work horse of any Navy. These ships are cheap enough to use in a variety of ways but versatile enough to fill a multitude of roles.
Wednesday 27 June 2012
Saturday 16 June 2012
Fixing the cracked buckets in the Sandbox
A lot has been going on lately in the world of Eve. Burn Jita, Hulkageddon, OTEC, persistent Hulkageddon, changes to war declarations, and future plans for ship changes. Most of the above are things I disagree with on principal but I do admire the ability to pull a lot of it off in the game. I've helped herd cats in other games and I know it's never easy to get a group of people to jump the same direction at the same time.
So with all of this activity I thought I'd spend some time discussing the concept of a sandbox game since I see the term bandied about quite frequently on the forums. The first thing I did was went looking for any type of consistent definition. Unfortunately there was no consensus opinion on what exactly was meant by sandbox. The best I could find was a game where the developers provided sand and toys then the players set about creating the content. In most cases content is considered activities like blockading a system, ganking other players, manufacturing, and all of the meta game activities that go on behind the scenes.
The more I thought about what some people defined as content the more I realized that the problem I'm seeing isn't a reflection of player actions as much as the problem was one of CCP's poor implementation. Let's go back to the sandbox and the dev's handing out toys to use for castle building and what not. The issue is not players using the toys they are given but rather some of the toys have a flawed design.
So with all of this activity I thought I'd spend some time discussing the concept of a sandbox game since I see the term bandied about quite frequently on the forums. The first thing I did was went looking for any type of consistent definition. Unfortunately there was no consensus opinion on what exactly was meant by sandbox. The best I could find was a game where the developers provided sand and toys then the players set about creating the content. In most cases content is considered activities like blockading a system, ganking other players, manufacturing, and all of the meta game activities that go on behind the scenes.
The more I thought about what some people defined as content the more I realized that the problem I'm seeing isn't a reflection of player actions as much as the problem was one of CCP's poor implementation. Let's go back to the sandbox and the dev's handing out toys to use for castle building and what not. The issue is not players using the toys they are given but rather some of the toys have a flawed design.
Friday 1 June 2012
Jumping Through Hoops
One more post about the upcoming Alliance Tournament. I thought I was finished with this subject but a response by a Dev deserves comment. The first quote verifies the rules were intentionally written to cause confusion among the player base. The second quote invalidates the reason behind banning Hydra and Outbreak as being because of working together on Sisi. I'd quote the exact text explaining the bans, but the posts have been pulled down.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1398070#post1398070
Edit* To top it all off a thread I started explaining my disappointment was mocked by CCP Soundwave. It might be time to find a new game if that is their idea of professionalism.
At this point I think the truth is that Hydra and Outbreak were never going to be allowed to participate in this years Alliance Tournament. The two alliances were banned because they were in the same corp on test but we are now told that it's not against the AT rules to combine on test. Hydra and Outbreak said they sent multiple emails and petitions to determine if their practice of testing against each other on Sisi was against the rules and eventually they received a reply saying it was ok, but in the end the AT Dev's banned the two groups anyway.
"This rule is vague because it has to be. We have had 9 tournaments without this rule and for good reason, but the events of last year have forced us to react by including new rules such as the one above. Tournament staff and referees will act based on the information available and with the tournament both as an event for the players on the field and those watching on the stream on their minds.https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1392266#post1392266
Teams and players should hold the tournament in high regard and take the event seriously, if you have to ask yourself "would they stop the fight if we did this" then you should not do it. ""
"Sorry missed the bit about the test server, you can change corps and alliances as you like on Sisi. But based on actions taken by us so far I would be very wary if you intend to join someone else's alliance for "practice & logistics" reasons. Again, if your not sure about it, don't risk it."
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1398070#post1398070
Edit* To top it all off a thread I started explaining my disappointment was mocked by CCP Soundwave. It might be time to find a new game if that is their idea of professionalism.
At this point I think the truth is that Hydra and Outbreak were never going to be allowed to participate in this years Alliance Tournament. The two alliances were banned because they were in the same corp on test but we are now told that it's not against the AT rules to combine on test. Hydra and Outbreak said they sent multiple emails and petitions to determine if their practice of testing against each other on Sisi was against the rules and eventually they received a reply saying it was ok, but in the end the AT Dev's banned the two groups anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)