| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
KenKaniff69
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
429
   |
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:28:00 -
[1] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Jetti Daxcide wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Oswald Rehnquist wrote:The idea that any empire would actually hire some of the lazy peeps that we see enter this low security theater is laughable.
I propose a few things
1) Losers of said match don't get paid at all (free cash win or lose should be a pub thing)
2) Payouts double and triple when an Empire is underrepresented in FW aka is clearly losing eve side.
3) Merit based rewards (salvage/LP), you get rewarded more (or less) based on your history/contributions to the war effort with said factions equipment/weapons.
Thoughts? 1) Even in PC we pay out both sides, I can't see us not doing that for FW. That being said while raw ISK may be paid out that doesn't mean other things have to be. :) 2) Interesting, shall have to think about it. I am a bit tired right now but we had some reasons for not wanting to do that... those reasons may have changed now but as I said, tired... :) 3) Agreed. :) before you do the third can you bring out mim and amarr vehicles Those are not my area, but I suppose we could delay the feature until they get done at an unknown point in time...
Hmmmmmmm....... |
KenKaniff69
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
429
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Aero Yassavi wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:
Those are not my area, but I suppose we could delay the feature until they get done at an unknown point in time...
Unknown point in time, really? Unless you're just playing with us, which I hope you are, does the team at CCP really not even have a general idea for when they want to release these? Quite frankly I don't know how you can balance all the vehicles when you're missing half of the variants. But alas, I realize I am griping to the wrong dev here. To be fair, I see lots of very detailed spreadsheets and schedules and just don't personally keep track of details of other teams beyond the current patch we are working on. I just have a hard enough time keeping track of everything on our teams to do list. :( Edit: I realize now what I should have said is actually "unknown to me point in time"
Thoughts? |
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2081
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
I NEED AMARR HAV! I NEED IT! |
Halador Osiris
Dead Six Initiative
Lokun Listamenn
658
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Oswald Rehnquist wrote:The idea that any empire would actually hire some of the lazy peeps that we see enter this low security theater is laughable.
I propose a few things
1) Losers of said match don't get paid at all (free cash win or lose should be a pub thing) Well... This doesn't exactly relate to Minmatar/Amarr vehicles, but... I'd like to bring up that this is war, not battle. If the US lost in Iraq, we'd probably still pay Blackwater for the contracting work they did for us. Whether or not we lost in Iraq is a different debate for a different time..
Now, back on topic:
NEEDZ LAZOR TANK!!! |
KenKaniff69
Subdreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
429
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
True Adamance wrote: I NEED AMARR HAV! I NEED IT!
Soon(TM)??? 1.5 is looking like a big fail. |
True Adamance
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
2081
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:37:00 -
[6] - Quote
KenKaniff69 wrote:True Adamance wrote: I NEED AMARR HAV! I NEED IT! Soon(TM)??? 1.5 is looking like a big fail.
How can we confirm this. We have nether the patch notes nor dev conformation that any non useful of progressive features are being added. I'm hoping since 1.5 is supposed to be a Vehicle patch.... they must consider Implementing the other vehicle types |
Ryder Azorria
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
582
|
Posted - 2013.09.17 15:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
True Adamance wrote:KenKaniff69 wrote:True Adamance wrote: I NEED AMARR HAV! I NEED IT! Soon(TM)??? 1.5 is looking like a big fail. How can we confirm this. We have nether the patch notes nor dev conformation that any non useful of progressive features are being added. I'm hoping since 1.5 is supposed to be a Vehicle patch.... they must consider Implementing the other vehicle types
They're doing the opposite.
From the big "Vehicles in 1.5 and beyond!" thread
CCP Wolfman wrote:Remove GÇ£noiseGÇ¥ so that we can focus on the core archetypes.
Right now there are simply too many things doing too much all at once. Module offerings will be streamlined to just the most necessary archetypes. Once weGÇÖve established a solid foundation weGÇÖll start to introduce types and build back out. Similarly, vehicle roles will be reduced and then re-implemented properly once the base interactions are working well. Skill bonuses will be adjusted.
Reading is your friend.  |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |