Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
I am the only one that wants to se Incarna fail ?
cosy
Member UncommonPosts: 3,228
in EVE Online
i want to see Incarna failing because CCP put allot of resources in this and leaving unfinished features and some of old promises never got implemneted like:
-treaties
-dominion sov
-faction warfare
-scanning to find belts for mining
-agents in 0.0 player controlled space
-modular items
-cosmos
-black ops are useless
-lag
-anti blob mechanics
-level 6 and 7 missions
-more t3 ships and balance
-the damn UI
-...
we got eve gate because need a link to dust
we got planetary interaction because we need stuff for dust
we get Incarna because we need a engine and technology for word of darkness
we get avatar clothing because vampires need clothes to
lately we dont get stuff because EvE need them we get because other games need them
-treaties
-dominion sov
-faction warfare
-scanning to find belts for mining
-agents in 0.0 player controlled space
-modular items
-cosmos
-black ops are useless
-lag
-anti blob mechanics
-level 6 and 7 missions
-more t3 ships and balance
-the damn UI
-...
we got eve gate because need a link to dust
we got planetary interaction because we need stuff for dust
we get Incarna because we need a engine and technology for word of darkness
we get avatar clothing because vampires need clothes to
lately we dont get stuff because EvE need them we get because other games need them
BestSigEver :P
Comments
Hehe, you're complaining about this?
Go ahead, post your in game handle, I'm sure other players with "sympathize" with you.
not sure what the problem with treaties is.. are you complaining because alliances can set each other to friendly or something ?
dominion sov... well you have to fight for it.. and hold it.. er.. isnt that the point ?
faction warfare - some people like it.. and its a trainer for regular pvp.. what part of it didnt you like?
scanning for belts, scanning is actually difficult and you have to work on the skills,
agents in 0.0 player controlled space, - so.. let me guess.. you tried to get to a sansha or serpentis agent in 0.0 and you got killed.. er.. its pvp, it happens.
black ops is useless, ... well their expensive, but its a battleship that allows you to bridge in other cov ops ships, its a tactical problem.. and used correctly, are pretty amazing.
lag - continualy improving so that they can have greater numbers in system, in combat.. something they continue working on all the time..
anti blob mechanics... .. seriously ??? you don't want people to form fleets to fight each other ??
level 6 and 7 missions.. er.. ever hear of plexes and wormholes.. if you want something more difficult than a level 5 mission, then theres your target..
but.. .. modular items.. roflmao..
okay, clearly you don't like Eve, so why oh why are you so concerned with a game you obviously don't like ?
They actually got someone to create a new UI for the game. Finally. Years after launch.
What would be so good about it if it failed? Its definatly going ahead like it or not.
I dont understand your logic, if it failed then it would be yet another incomplete feature... which is exactly what your complaining about.
Logically your just providing a very good argument for why you wouldnt want it to fail.
I think your very confused.
Thing is Incarna will bring something to Eve which will make Eve incredibly popular. And if they get more subscriptions they can afford more staff to work on things which needs working on.
Which ever way you look at it, nobody "wishes" that incarna will fail. Incarna "failing" will be a very bad thing for everyone. They will spend MORE time correcting it meaning your wish list will take even longer.
What you want to be wishing for is that Incarna deploys 100% successfully, hardly any problems and everyone will love it! Even the people who dont think they will like it.
I dont want to see Incarna fail; what I would like is for it to reflect the level of resources put into it by giving us varied and engaging gameplay in a wholly new way that we never had in EVE before.
However, I am much less likely to get my wish than you are.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
All that stuff is currently being worked on along side Incarna.
CCP has more people working on the game today than it ever has.
Ironically, some of your complaints will probably be resolved with Incarna.
Incarna
(9 teams, approximately 70 developers)
Dust 514/EVE link
(1 team, approximately 7 developers)
In-space features
(3 teams, approximately 22 developers)
EVE Gate
(1 team, approximately 10 developers)
The others!
(4 teams, approximately 15 developers)
http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=777
BestSigEver :P
Wow! That's much more than the 21 people that intitially worked on EVE and there are more to come.
Hell, they have 22 people working on space alone.
Whining about lag in eve is stupid. There will always be lag unless they start with instancing or sharding, which is even worse.
Due to the nature of fights in eve, if CCP made it possible to have 5000 ships in a battle with no lag, the large coalitions would just bring 10000 people to the fights, and thus we lag again. They have the man power to do that, right now it's mostly what the system can handle that makes it unneccesary to bring more.
You know an expansion failed, when one of the main features neither makes it live, nor is known by anyone but people who are following development closely.
FYI: treaties were supposed to be implemented post-dom after they didn't make it for the release (just like storefronts) and were an integral part of the sov system design.
But hey, ambulation was more important than eve, so both the new sov system design and treaties and the industrial expansion were canceled, and because they had already hyped their sov overhaul, they just dumped something inferior to the old system on the server.
That old fallacy doesn't get truer the more you repeat it.
It is a problem engineered by bad game design and augmented by the decrease in server performance post dominion.
That fights inevitably escalate past the 400 people mark where the server craps itself is a direct result of a system that not only favours numbers over everything, but where ships exist that are so powerful, that several dozen people are needed just to counter them.
If CCP game design wasn't led by people with a coke addiction, they could've succeeded in drastically cutting down engagement sizes instead of increasing them..
what a load of crap, even if the game was fully balanced people would still bring as many people as they could. Numbers is always going to give you an advantage no matter how the game is designed (if were still trying to keep the game a sandbox). I wonder, have you finally unsubbed or are you still bitching about a product you still use?
Playing: EVE Online
Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online
Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2
KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
in order to kill blobs there are many many way to do it just need to start whit jump bridges and titan portals the funny part is a WH have a colpase point based on mass but titan portals dont have any
from a RP point of view titan portals are much weeker that a WH but you still can move a capital fleet
BestSigEver :P
perhaps thats why Titans are so freaking expensive.. not to mention you can't do really convenient things with them.. like DOCK.. so when you want to go fly something more 'shooty' you have to park it in a really secure location.. like a heavily armed POS.. which is why Titans are only for large Corps that can fund that kind of expenditure.. or in most cases.. Alliances.. the Titan is a fleet tool.. really useful.. but.. hideously problematic from a logistical standpoint.. i'll stick to Cruisers for PVP.. its cheaper.. and nobody steals your ship when your not looking
did you read from a RP point of view you totaly miss the point
also if a titan cost 2 time more that means should be able to move more capital ships no ? what if a titan cost 10 times more?
oh wait there is a limit on how many ships can be on a fleet and only fleet members can use a titan portal
oh wait that means is a arbitrary design decision not a logical decision based on metrics and RP
do you see that titan cost have nothing to do whit this ?
BestSigEver :P
I see you're still as clueless as ever.
Thankfully, history has proven my point already after Apocrypha effectively lifted the upper cap and it wasn't reached for months. In fact, average engagement size decreased due to how the sov system worked back then forcing effective timezone spread and therefore less numbers per objective.
But don't let evidence and argumentation get between you and your shitposting. I'm sure you can repeat the mantra a few dozen times to reassure you that the fallacy is correct..
From an RP point of view, i think, one is an opening that allows ships to past thru and the other is a gravity well that throws ships from one place to another.
They're not the same.
fleet battles were well above 1100+, unless you have some evidence proving your "opinion"? If you think that alliances wont continue trying to get as many people inside a system, then your not only arrogant but ignorant as well. Shoot, coming from an ex-NC member, i'm surprised i'm even having this conversation with you.
As for the jump bridges being removed, i think that would curb the blobs for a small time, but eventually they would come right back. As long as people will continue to blue their neighbors and as long as more people continue subscribing to eve, the blobs are only going to get bigger. AFAIK, blob warfare is a feature and not a problem, the lag is the problem.
Playing: EVE Online
Favorite MMOs: WoW, SWG Pre-cu, Lineage 2, UO, EQ, EVE online
Looking forward to: Archeage, Kingdom Under Fire 2
KUF2's Official Website - http://www.kufii.com/ENG/ -
BestSigEver :P
You're essentially asking for EVE to fail, if you don't realize the stake they've put into this feature, and I know you do. Some people act like it's such a huge deal that they have so many resources dedicated to this feature, but then forget all about it and actually want to see it fail? Really? You want such a long invested feature, with a bunch of money and development time dedicated to it, to just... fail. I'm glad you're not making decisions about this game, or it probably would have failed years ago. Wow, I guess CCP should just stop trying to advance their product entirely, regardless of if the feature affects the bulk of the player base or not. All that money will just go down the drain, and welp.. there goes World of Darkness too. Guess Dust is never going to happen either at this point.. better just look forward to EVE coming crashing down within the next year or two.
Sometimes I wonder whether you even care about this game or company cosy, or if it's "just another game" to you and if it doesn't cater to exactly what you want, you'll just go elsewhere. I hope Incarna succeeds if only for the sake of proving all the haters wrong. Of course, at that point, we're probably not going to see much "I was wrong" from anyone, because people are cowards when it comes to that.
Hell, your 'reasons' in the OP aren't even reasons. They're just complaints.
if u ask me if i care about well i used to care but now not so much, it bother me allot that CCP dont care enough about the actual game, the day by day game play, the game that support all that bs(wod,dust,incarna,carbon).
BestSigEver :P
No. I want Incarna to succeed as much as possible so we will not have another half-done feature and CCP can allocate all resources to finally start building on all the "foundations" (COSMOS, Factional Warfare, Epic Mission Arcs, Incursions, Planetary Interaction and so forth) there already exists.