Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BloodBird]

Sheesh, guys, fetch a towel, you're bittervetting all over the place. 

Your opinion has been noted.

As for this topic, as previously stated I'm rather happy to see all this, steps in the right direction for sure. Only thing that would be great now is some form of capital limitation in FW space ala perma-jammers, and a scale-back-to-start on timers if no-one runs complexes, likely with an accelerated counter when someone actively defends. Thus allowing you to defend contested systems for LP, or leave the complex to count back down on it's own if you can't/won't finish it on your own.

Oh, and the mentioned T1 cruisers and below only type of complex like they will do for frigates, to make T1 cruisers worth something in FW.

Other than these points, I'm rather happy about this. ill be interesting to see how things change come winter.

[Desiderya]

Oh, and the mentioned T1 cruisers and below only type of complex like they will do for frigates, to make T1 cruisers worth something in FW.

This was my first reaction, too, but I'm willing to wait on juicy new stats for the Winter cruiser rebalancing. Of course a 10 man T2 gang will outclass a 10 man T1 gang, but fights aren't going to happen based on equal numbers alone. Although it will mean a lot more Falcons - but let's see how ECM revamp is going to pan out.

[Silas Vitalia]

Sheesh, guys, fetch a towel, you're bittervetting all over the place. 

I calls em likes I sees em.   

Thread is for opinions on the FW iteration.

While a lot of promising changes CCP continues to re-arrange deck chairs on the titanic with the multitude of broken and unsolved core pvp issues.  I bitch because I care and I've loved and sweated for this game for years.

[Ken]

I have no opinion on the mechanics of the cyno issue because I don't fly capitals and very rarely have found myself on grid with them (and not once in FW).  Having the jamming function resident in a defensible/destructible structure separate from the plexes and ihubs would be a neat addition though.

What I'd like to see is a bloody timer reset when the last button-pusher warps out. I suspect it'll curtail the hordes of no-risk LP farmers a fair bit more than most of the other changes.

Hell yes.  The natural state for the button should be zero seconds on the timer.

restrictions for complexes

capital blobs

I don't follow.  Capitals can only deploy inside the minority of complexes that are unrestricted.  Suppose banning them from the FW systems altogether would prevent the threat of capital blobbing, such as it is, but I think the plex restrictions already accomplish the goal of channelizing and restricting PVP along the desired lines.

And, for the record, playing in the kiddie pool is extremely fun--as much if not more fun than swimming in the nudist lagoon of nullsec.

While a lot of promising changes CCP continues to re-arrange deck chairs on the titanic

ehrmagerd eev os daieeng?!?

 

Thread is for opinions on the FW iteration.

Yea, including the bitter opinions.

vOv  I calls em like I sees em.

[Morwen Lagann]

Oh, and the mentioned T1 cruisers and below only type of complex like they will do for frigates, to make T1 cruisers worth something in FW.

This was my first reaction, too, but I'm willing to wait on juicy new stats for the Winter cruiser rebalancing. Of course a 10 man T2 gang will outclass a 10 man T1 gang, but fights aren't going to happen based on equal numbers alone. Although it will mean a lot more Falcons - but let's see how ECM revamp is going to pan out.

As someone who's likely not to get involved in FW, take my opinion with as much salt/sugar as you'd like, but I think the "rookie plexes" idea should be expanded, and that plexes should be segregated into two groups for each 'size': restricted, and unrestricted (borrowing old plex terms just for simplicity, limited/unlimited would work well enough). Restricted plexes act like these "rookie" plexes: Basic T1 hulls of accepted sizes only. No faction, no T2. Just T1. Unrestricted would be, well, unrestricted in this sense: any hull of the appropriate size would be allowed inside.

The lack of a "T1-only" plex for cruiser-and-larger ships just seems like a Not Very Good Idea to me in general. If they're going to spend time rebalancing the things it seems even worse; rebalancing isn't always enough to get people to use something if the T2 or faction variations are still that much better.

[Silas Vitalia]

And, for the record, playing in the kiddie pool is extremely fun--as much if not more fun than swimming in the nudist lagoon of nullsec.

I think you missed my point in that I'm a supporter of the "kiddie pool" idea in a big way, and I just think they are dropping the ball on this with the current mechanics. It's not about one type of PVP being better than another it's about all of them being rewarding in their own ways to different skill levels, and encouraging / discouraging specific gameplay to reinforce a special area for younger players, and grow the subscriber base.

The current FW setup makes it impossible for subcap fleets of larger numbers to engage without hotdrop super bukake bonanza.  You better believe if they removed capitals from FW you guys would be getting huge subcap fleet fights of -just- the sort that they like to promote in the advertising.  Pilots are gunshy to roll the dice because they know lurking behind every fight is potential for stupid and instant escalation.  This is fine and should be ok in null, not in FW.

And building subscriber base should be of the utmost right now for CCP. 

You people just wait until DUST completely bombs and those millions spent on development do not get repaid.  That last round of layoffs will look like nothing.

I also don't see how being snarky is contributing to the discussion, so maybe tone it down?

[Ken]

  Snark for snark is the way it's done. c/d?  Just defending the boss.  CEO's attack dog and all.  Generally though I think the bittervet mindset and identity are poisonous so I'm apt to oppose both and defend those who do the same.

As for subcap pwnage fest and the consequences of caps in lowsec FW, the way you described it makes sense.  I'd be onboard for full cyno jamming in the warzone.

Why do you assess DUST to be set for complete failure?

[Victoria Stecker]

People familiar with it may have other gripes, but the biggest issue is that it's based around a persistent universe, hopefully getting people to play for a long time, invest in it, etc.

There are gamers like that. They play on PCs. The console business model is based around churning out shiny after shiny to get players to buy. The result of the business model is that the player based is made up of people who want to jump from shiny to shiny.

tl;dr console players don't have the attention span to make the game a success (gross generalization).

[Ken]

Well, the PS3 exclusive last only 12 months after release, right?  I think we'll eventually have DUST on PC.

[Silas Vitalia]

Snark for snark is the way it's done. c/d?  Just defending the boss.  CEO's attack dog and all.  Generally though I think the bittervet mindset and identity are poisonous so I'm apt to oppose both and defend those who do the same.

As for subcap pwnage fest and the consequences of caps in lowsec FW, the way you described it makes sense.  I'd be onboard for full cyno jamming in the warzone.

Why do you assess DUST to be set for complete failure?

No worries mate

"bomb" is a broad term but a few things stack the deck against the game in a big way

1. PS3 exclusive for consoles cuts out more than 50% of console market, and millions of FPS players.

2. The PS3 multiplayer experience is generally garbage. Inviting friends, forming groups, and all being on the same audio can be tiresome and is often outright broken.  Compare the xbox live multiplayer to ps3.  For a highly social, complicated, and by necessity hierarchical game with strategy and the need for effective organization, the PS3 is the absolute last console you want to be doing this sort of thing with.

3. Console players (generalization here) are finicky and have comparatively short gaming attention spans to PC players.  PC games can last for years and grow in reputation and dedication, but console games ALL have extremely short shelf-life, and shooters shorter than many others.  Yes the die-hards stick around, but after a few months the online population of most console games falls off a cliff. This bodes poorly for one that is supposedly highly tied to a concurrent PC game with a more stable player base. Of course if the 'connection' between the two is more cosmetic then it won't be that critical. 

But try hopping on most console FPS games a year or so later and seeing how busy they are.  There are a few exceptions but this does not have a HALO / Call of Duty budget or following. Mid-tier shooters fall off a population cliff after a few months.

4. 'too complicated' for typical FPS console market.  COD / HALO work because you jump on with random team or a few friends, run around, and kill the other people.  Even then it's difficult to stand playing with random people.  This game has far more planning, building, and complexity. It will be super, super awesome for about 1/5 of the FPS players, the other 100,000 14-year olds screaming 'faggot' into the microphone and trying to teabag your corpse will go elsewhere.

[Ghost Hunter]

The problem is if they take it to the PC while the PS3 is active, computer players will vastly outskill any PS3 player. This is a function of hardware limitations, the ceiling is very low for console players. If they ever plan to move to the PC, why not do it at the launch to an already-loyal crowd? Their reasoning was to tap into a new pool of players, instead of overtaxing the existing one - I think; someone might need to find a quote for that.

Console games in general have a vastly shorter life expectancy and longevity than PC games because they are incredibly rigid and unmoving. The sequential Halo evolution (1, 2, 3, 4, etc) is the best example of how console games thrive. DUST 514 is proposing something that is entirely antithesis to the nature of consoles. What will it do when the PS3 is phased out (in the next year or two)? Rewrite the code for a new console every few years?

Things like that have made me leery about D514's survival rate. I can see it doing great at launch for a while, but as the aging cycle of consoles rotates I don't think it will stay afloat.

[Ken]

This game has far more planning, building, and complexity. It will be super, super awesome for about 1/5 of the FPS players, the other 100,000 14-year olds screaming 'faggot' into the microphone and trying to teabag your corpse will go elsewhere.

Isn't that also the EVE model?  Accessibility issues with the console aside, "DUST is HARD" would be a selling point for folks like us and we've kept EVE going now for almost 10 years.

I can see it doing great at launch for a while, but as the aging cycle of consoles rotates I don't think it will stay afloat.

It's at that point that I think we'd see it brought over to PC.

[Victoria Stecker]

Isn't that also the EVE model?  Accessibility issues with the console aside, "DUST is HARD" would be a selling point for folks like us and we've kept EVE going now for almost 10 years.

Making another gross generalization - console games have been primarily geared toward 'fun' rather than 'challenging' in order to drive sales. This results in a user base that values 'fun' over 'challenging.' It's a bit circular.

Are there people our there that would love challenging console games? Sure. Will Dust514 be enough to get them to buy PS3s when previously they've just stuck with PCs? Only of CCP make one muthafukka of a game.

[Silas Vitalia]

This game has far more planning, building, and complexity. It will be super, super awesome for about 1/5 of the FPS players, the other 100,000 14-year olds screaming 'faggot' into the microphone and trying to teabag your corpse will go elsewhere.

Isn't that also the EVE model?  Accessibility issues with the console aside, "DUST is HARD" would be a selling point for folks like us and we've kept EVE going now for almost 10 years.

The eve model just doesn't work on consoles.  Consoles are like the film industry.  You have to front load, roll the dice and spend x millions of dollars, pray for a fantastic opening weekend and push for a month or two to make your profit, and then that's all she wrote.

DLC has expanded this a bit but the fundamentals are much more cutthroat than slow-burn lower development cost pc games

[Desiderya]

Ah, Innovation. Everyone says that they want it, but when it finally comes around it's greeted with the universal fail fanfare because it's not doing things like history has proven things should work.

If no one tries to sell something new on the console market we'll never know whether it'll work or not. Maybe there are indeed people out there who aren't 15 and insult people on CoD and still own multiple gaming systems.
If you think 'The PC Gamer' is different you should rethink any experiences you had with public CS servers and notice that some elementary facts never change since people are apparently more or less the same.

Anyway, thread derail complete