Ankbar Latrommi
S.e.V.e.N. General Tso's Alliance
57
|
Posted - 2014.02.04 21:53:00 -
[1] - Quote
Shyeer Alvarin wrote:Alright, so. Chances are, I'm going to get a lot of hate. ... 1: I would be in full support of dishing out a Dropsuit Command respec... 1a: I would -not- be in support of a -full- respec. ... 1b: I would not support a Vehicle Respec. ...
2: I don't want Planetary Conquest shut down. I want a full board reset. There's more to that as well. 2a: Were PC to be wiped clean, ... 2b: Districts should not generate ISK for "overstocking." ...
3a: Impliment a "Team Deploy" ... 3b: Implement a Meta-Tracker ... -3bi: This would prevent pubstompers from getting into matches with people that are trying to legitimately play the game with their friends... 3c: Impliment a "difficulty level" setting...
4: Alliances. While I don't agree with a previous post that I read that DUST players should be able to CREATE alliances, I do believe that DUST CEO's should have the option of JOINING alliances. ...
5: Skill Training ...
I don't need to hate you to disagree with your proposals. ;)
1) Given that racial parity is finally coming, I'm okay with a respec. I'm also okay with no respec. 1a) agreed 1b) agreed, not even sure why you mention this. Folks know CCP is reworking vehicles, they shouldn't be sinking any points they aren't okay with keeping. That's a benefit to the way Eve-D does SP differently than Eve-O--if you wanted to wait in Eve-O you'd actually be losing SP.
2 2a) No to a reset. Sorry, but no. Those corps have taken those districts. When it's fixed, if you don't like them having districts, take it from them. 2b) I don't know really anything about that part of the topic, but that's likely just a placeholder for the player market. At some point, 'extra' will just be a surplus, driving unit prices down.
3a) Absolutely. i don't know why this wasn't included from the start, but then it's amazing it took till now to have racial parity. 3b 3c) No. Open, risky, sandbox. Not much of a sandbox now, but no steps should be taken towards a safe playground, even if it would help retention while they're making DUST what it can be. At some point in the future that would have to be removed, and imagine the QQ it would get then. No, just have people used to it from the start.
4) Sure.
5) No, no real need. Those are all attitude things, not game balance or design issues. Solvable within the self.
Reiner Knizia-"When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning."
Eve> FPS
|
Ankbar Latrommi
S.e.V.e.N. General Tso's Alliance
59
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 19:14:00 -
[2] - Quote
Shyeer Alvarin wrote:OP Updated: Point 3d
"3d: Alternatively, implement game-mode variants with meta-based restrictions. IE: MLT (Academy), STD (MLT/STD gear only. Suits with Adv/Proto are blocked), ADV (MLT/STD/ADV), and of course... Sandbox. (MLT/STD/ADV/PRO)"
That's not a sandbox, though, that's just 'hard mode'. In sandbox, you don't get to tell other people what they can't bring. In sandbox, you don't get to draw a little line around yourself and say "I'll only engage risk like this." You choose your level of risk by your level of engagement and what you bring, not by restricting others.
Reiner Knizia-"When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning."
Eve> FPS
|