|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
1955
|
Posted - 2014.01.05 07:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
Bump, try Trollish GD, more exposure but well it's GD.
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
1965
|
Posted - 2014.01.07 06:49:00 -
[2] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Killar-12 wrote:A few questions In what ways would you wish to see the Connection between capsuleers and infantry expanded? I see a future where DUST mercs are rewarded materials in PvE which they can sell to EVE industrials to manufacture DUST gear, which, they can then sell back to DUSTies. I want DUST as part of the supply chain in EVE. Of course, that starts with the player market, and requires monetary transfer between DUST and EVE as well. I'd also like to see EVE teams implement more recognition of DUST features. DUST stats on character sheets, district status and ownership visible in the EVE star map, and the ability to see how a match is going (kill feed, current MCC health, clones remaining) from orbit. Eventually, I'd like to see Planetary Conquest be a direct component of the sovereignty system in EVE, allowing districts to play a crucial part in major alliances owning territory all across New Eden. They need a reason to hire us, and sovereignty is it. Killar-12 wrote:How high on your list of priorities is having dust able to perform a constant framrate of say 20 FPS? 20 FPS is terrible. A baseline of terrible is not much of an improvement. The thing with game performance, is I feel it's not something you prioritize at the cost of other progress. Game performance improvements needs to be a constant cycle, and CCP needs to ensure they can develop content and new features, while simultaneously improving performance, without compromising either process. Content can't stop flowing in the name of frame rate improvement, but we can't have frame rate continually dropping because of new features, either. Killar-12 wrote:Would you wish for the return of Corporation Battles or rather the introduction of Team Deploy for Factional warfare? Team deploy would be nice, and I hope CCP gets it worked out soon, but I think the need for corporate battles is separate. There needs to be a system by which a corporation can schedule a match with another corporation outright. Even team deploy on two different factions can't ensure that two corps that want to duke it out can. And that's why I feel we still need a replacement for Corporation Battles in addition to the gameplay modes we already have. We need a way for corporations to set up custom battles. And sure, they'd have to be no-SP battles, since they'd be easily exploitable. But ideally, we should be able to set a fight at a time, select the game mode, ISK stakes, and the corp we'd like to invite to take us on. Thanks for the response...
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
1989
|
Posted - 2014.01.11 19:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:Bear D'Grassi wrote:You have a job and perhaps family that will demand part of your time, you are part of our alliance leadership, you are part of a corporations leadership, I assume you will still devote time to playing the games of EVE and Dust and finally the time demands placed on you by being part of the CPM. How do you envisage balancing these demands and how much time do you believe you will be able to devote to the CPM? I don't have a lot of family obligations, I have parents and siblings, but I'm single and have no kids. I spend a lot of time on social networks, and I mean, a lot, and I expect to allow the CPM to consume that time. I talk to a lot of people as it is, and I am a prolific multitasker with holding various conversations online. My job has me sitting by the Internet, and I spent a lot of my personal time in front of computers as well. I will be there. Corp leadership is doing fine, and the alliance is doing great. One of the big differences between now and a year ago, is that a year ago I was doing a very large portion of our alliance's management work. We now have an excellent leadership team, and we're actually working on bringing more people into that team right now. A good leadership team for an alliance can't be reliant on one person's availability, and I think we've more than accomplished that goal. I can't say I can measure "available hours" persay, because being part of the CPM isn't something you can schedule. It pervades every waking moment on the Internet. So I sleep like 6 hours, so I imagine I'll be handling CPM stuff like 18 hours a day, between everything else I'm doing. Soraya's position in TCR lead isn't quite how it looks... I try to handle things on my own or have the other director do stuff.
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
2127
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 01:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
Matobar wrote:Hey Soraya, wanted to see if you've seen/commented on this idea. Top Men's districts are A PFC and B Open. IDK if he likes it or not, that's just me being subbed to this thread.
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
2133
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 17:35:00 -
[5] - Quote
Gets popcorn This is getting good Beers and Soraya 5 mill to who ever wins, now fight to the death...
Soraya, Going to have to agree with beers here (puts forum warrior hat on), A) ISK ought to stay in their pockets It's ****** up, but it is what it is. B) There isn't an Economy C) Fighting (oddly) does generate ISK D) FW isn't an acceptable alternative E) ISK spread isn't a big deal (Mercs) sure N-F and RA members can run lots of proto but they are a sliver of the total population
Beers, Going to go with my Director here(puts top hat on) A) votes can be regained, PC Vets aren't terribly hard to sway back, promise CB's and PC 2.0, and some FW rework support and you'd get a good chunk of support B)ISK spread is a big deal (Corps) this is partially a complaint about PC in general it's a pain for a new group to PC 120 clones is rarely enough give a choice of a cheap 120 man and a more expensive 150 man choice still it's a pain to get into PC, hell I coughed up 30 Mill to help some new guys do a training PFC
Going to speak my mind here (takes hats off) PC is ****** up, FW is ****** up, Pubs are ****** up and the NPE is ****** up.
PC (look Just read one of Sentient's posts on this I'm too lazy to comment) Remove Passive ISK Gereation or Nerf it to **** (Beers and Soraya I've seen both of you agree on this) Implement Active ISK generation.
FW Add player trading do some work on how FW battles work, (Beers you had a thread that looked great on this subject)
Pubs Lot's of suggestions too tired to list them all.
Rework the Academy, add Help channels and Recruitment Channels.
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
2133
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 20:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:CPM candidates can't "promise" anything, Killar. Though I do vastly support the ability to make custom matches between corps, and I'm salivating about the possibilities of PC 2.0. ;)
Regarding PC ISK generation, I'd almost suggest massively ramping up active generation, and making it actually cost ISK to hold territory. So you have no incentive to hold more than you can actively use. Similarly to EVE, where you actually have to pay a sovereignty bill to maintain your territory. Promise is the wrong word true then again writing a post in 3 mintues I think I did pretty well tbqh but the Idea gets through.
A-Teams win Battles B-Teams win Campaigns C-Teams win Wars
|
Killar-12
The Corporate Raiders Top Men.
2167
|
Posted - 2014.02.03 22:08:00 -
[7] - Quote
Canari Elphus wrote:Free Beers wrote:Canari Elphus wrote:Free Beers wrote:Canari Elphus wrote:I would like to clear something up here.
Even an all out PC war will not keep players from pub matches. As a member of Ancient Exiles., I got to see this first hand during the P5/RA war. PC in its current state is not complicated enough to occupy players' full attention. I agree. Then you should give up your districts you don't have time to give your full attention to. If you did that then what you say would be true. Sadly AE's ego and want for isk > any real moral justification. I don't blame you for locking districts as PC is terrible design, but trying to justify it more than a simple "We are doing it" is lame. As I am not in the leadership of AE, I cannot speak on their behalf as far as motivation for locking districts or giving up any. What I do know is that up until this, AE has not locked their districts from threats and has taken the risk of losing them. This game should never be about charity or making everything fair. It should be about giving everyone the same opportunity and allowing them to make of it what they will. This isnt little league, everyone doesnt get a participation trophy. So wait let me get this straight. Your corp locks its districts to farm passive isk and you are talking about participation trophies when its your corp that said "Alright we can't defend all these timers and have fun attacking so lets just settle for the participation isk trophy instead" Please stop posting you are making my AE buddies look bad and you should feel bad. Neither my corp nor I have said what you are quoting. If you insist on trying to put words in my mouth to try to get a rise out of me then we might as well end this conversation now. You can post as much as you want and about whatever you want but, until it actually has some relevant point of debate, it isnt worth responding to. If you have a beef with AE, I suggest you take it up with Kujo, Matt, Soul and the other directors. Soul's a Director? Kujo, MJ420 and Zaria I thought were.
Listen
I'll change the song every week
|
Killar-12
OLDSPICE. Top Men.
2694
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
Draco Cerberus wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:Hopefully we have a chance for more productive discussions in the future. I can't really promise everyone will like me, but I'll do my best to take everyone's comments to heart. You make my point for me so easily, yes it would be good to have more productive discussions in the future, not the idiotic attempts to distract from the topic and troll that you seem to be good at in the future. Why are you not in AE yet? Read Profiles in Courage... It's a real good book tbh, It shows Soraya's viewpoint rather well on Representative Democracy...
How to Leave PC
|
Killar-12
OLDSPICE. Top Men.
2694
|
Posted - 2014.04.22 23:34:00 -
[9] - Quote
Badgerr Rager wrote:Soraya Xel wrote:
I have a few very short goals for DUST 514. These concepts are my core beliefs about the game's future, and what's important in it's success:
- CCP needs to ramp up the EVE/DUST link, particularly by implementing a real economy for DUST 514. CCP has restated multiple times their focus on making DUST the best shooter. And while the idea of a better shooter (and frame rate, for God's sake) appeals to me greatly, the truth is, DUST will probably never beat Call of Duty or Battlefield as a first-person shooter alone. DUST is a niche game. It is a hybrid MMO with links to EVE Online. And most of the people I know who got excited hearing about DUST, were excited because of that link even if they didn't play EVE. CCP needs to commit full throttle to the link.
- CCP needs to embrace it's scifi setting, with unique environments, maps, and equipment. Right now, DUST is a mediocre shooter. It has little to set it apart from other games apart from it's science fiction setting, of which there is far more limited competition. Unlike Call of Duty or Battlefield, CCP isn't constrained to real-world weapons or environments. DUST can explore other worlds, starships, and even the emptiness of space itself. CCP needs to go full-on scifi, and again, focus on it's strengths. Embrace methods of gameplay that Call of Duty and Battlefield can only dream of. That means lava planets, changing gravity between planets of different sizes, and ship-based combat.
- CCP needs to be up-front with it's roadmap. As usual, all discussion of DUST 514 at the CSM summit was again under NDA. While EVE devs have profited greatly from the early feedback of players, DUST devs aren't communicating enough. While a test server is currently unfeasible (thank you, Sony), giving players the facts and the numbers up front will allow people to participate in the process of game development. Players need a better idea of CCP's roadmap for DUST 514, so they can put faith (and AUR-colored credits) in the long-term future of DUST. Laser-focused on PS3 is a nice short-term answer, but it won't cut it for the future. As a CPM member, I'll push heavily for greater disclosure with players on long-term plans, even if they aren't set in stone.
Obviously, DUST 514 is an incredibly complex game with a variety of important issues across the board. These three are the issues closest to my heart. If you chose to help me reach the CPM, you can be assured my inbox will always be open, and that putting your views in front of me will put them in front of CCP.
I believe CCP has this as their top goals for the game as people have been saying this for about a year now. You need to have creative and unique views and those are just too generic and the most talked about. I wish you luck against Appia as I think she is a solid contender 7 Votes... well kinda 7 votes but you can choose 7 people...
How to Leave PC
|
|
|
|