CCP Q&A: Reaction

Dracos Rhaghar 2017-07-10

The Stream:

Today, CCP held a Twitch stream which was advertised as a “Q&A” stream. While there was very little interaction with the audience, which has probably left a majority of the audience coming away from the stream with a “what the hell did I just watch” attitude, it can be argued that today’s stream answered a lot of questions, and promises much more for the future. The real hero of the Q&A, however, turned out to be CCP Rise, who single-handedly fielded question after question in the chat after the official stream ended.

The Balance Team

CCP began by discussing the implications of the Community Update which was posted on Friday, discussing the implementation of a new ‘Ships and Modules’ development team. CCP addressed the fact that they are aware that over the years, many ship and module balances have slipped through the cracks while they have been working on other things. While CCP has always had a group of developers who focused on these things, the team was comprised of developers who had other priorities. The new team will be solely focused on ships and modules, which means they can dedicate more time and effort into any issues they feel need fixing.

The new team’s priority is going to focus on balancing Alpha clones. Both the community and CCP feels that this is something that needs to be focused on, 9 months after the initial release of Alpha clones, along with developing new and exciting ships and modules. One such idea that was mentioned was Flack-Cannon Destroyers, which would likely be an Anti-Fighter Destroyer.

With regards to the impending T3 Cruiser changes, CCP advises that all T3C pilots should ensure they are docked before downtime July 11, as the new patch may affect their ability to use these ships while undocked.

Structures

CCP also confirmed that they are aware of the current issues with structures. The team that was focused on developing new Upwell Structures has now been told to focus on balancing the existing structures. This will include the vulnerability timers, offensive action against the structures, and the structure defence mechanisms.  The main point that was made is that CCP is aware of how Void Bombs on structures limit offensive fleet doctrines and they are going to examine changes that can be made regarding this.  In the next few expansions, the Structures team will also continue to add and modify quality of life features in the structures, such as Corp Offices and Corp Hangars.

Going Forward

Another question that was addressed was the lore of New Eden, and where CCP intends to take the NPC storyline within the game. Whilst CCP did not go into too much detail about the future direction of the NPC storyline, they are currently looking for a Live Producer for in-game events. This may indicate that we are likely to see much more activity from CCP in this sort of event in the future.

One point that was repeatedly touched on was CCP’s desire to remain engaged with the players as EVE moves forward. In August, the Winter Expansion will be discussed in detail. The Winter Expansion will be in part about High-Sec PVE and Moon Interactions. A lot of the information will appear in Dev Blogs, but CCP want to commit to more live-streams. Expanding the dialogue with the community will let them better clarify and prioritize changes.

CCP want the community to know they plan to engage more with them and be more receptive to open communication with players. Although today’s live stream was more of an update, they plan to hold more discussion streams in future.

What Does It Mean?

It can be concluded, when maintaining a clear head, that CCP has almost wrapped up their dealings with legacy code. This has opened up more development teams to move forward with the development of exciting and new aspects in EVE, while also fine-tuning the current mechanics.

When I first heard CCP announce that they were adding more high-sec mechanics, my initial reaction was “Why do we need more High-Sec content?” However, the truth is that high-sec is the very first thing a new player sees, and experiences. With a more active, and engaging high-sec, new players will have more activities to keep them engaged in the game, and playing. With the almost monthly cries of “EVE is dying!” it would seem that CCP is trying to revitalise the game in High-Sec, while also looking to improve life all over New Eden.

The After-Party

INN didn’t manage to get the stream chat from the beginning, but once the streamed section ended, reaction was… not exactly mixed.

victorcarrigan: So instead we’ll do a “Q&A” and then completely ignore the questions from the people who actually matter. The players who actually play the game and keep things going. Just like they completely ignore the players.
TheOrangeEagle: wait, is that it
MarkBacc: Q&A????????
SaintAeon: that was it? lol sry but this is weak
Skyrant: what a waste of time
AshadeGrey: thanks ccp
rihanshazih: that was a nice Q&A
Lestermination: Glad we submitted questions so you guys wouldn’t even answer them LUL
Samz812: wasnt this a Q&A? i didnt see much in the way of Q’s being A’d
Mikeazariah: darn, I was late
jim01q: wtf was that
black_dhalia: this is BS
Gabelliuss: WTF was that?
hpnotikEU: wait what?
Ketmalice: Wtf was this
Nimfix: RIOT!
NukeLEARg: wat
gimmick_of_arioch: to be fair y’all were spamming like morons
jack_l0: 20 min stream?
Tomato_Saucebot: LMAO
applepear1337: This is no Q&A
Extralonglasting: wtf What a waste of time

CCP Rise, however, had been participating in the chat since before the stream began, and continued answering questions from the chatters. While he wasn’t able to answer every question, his patience and persistence endured, and over the next hour, he was able to significantly swing the mood of the participants. At first, he certainly had his work cut out for him:

RenamedUser8675309: What was the goal of that stream?
CCP_Rise: @RenamedUser8675309 the goal was originally to address questions that came directly from the video blog at the end of last week, then it got expanded to q and a which made it too large so we tried to loop in questions from the q and a thread with questions from the video blog
RenamedUser8675309: @CCP_Rise And was that goal achieved in that twenty minute sound byte?
CCP_Rise: @RenamedUser8675309 not sure but I take it you don’t think so

The rest of the Q&A from the chat-after-the-stream is below:

Pyroboat: @CCP_Rise as a member of ships and modules team, can you make bowhead required skills list Advanced Spaceship Command V (it lists lvl 1 although the ship needs lvl 5)
CCP_Rise: @Pyroboat that just sounds like a bug I think? Submit a report and it will get fixed eventually

Moderninferno: @ccp_rise you were one of the first to utilize streaming platforms, does CCP have any more plans for reaching out to the community via twitch, or utilizing the current streamers for different things?
CCP_Rise: @Moderninferno yeah community team is actually in the middle of working on their streaming support and trying to do a lot more direct work with community streamers as far as I know

Shrapnel77: @CCP_Rise Are Obseratory Arrays still planned? and are they near completion?
CCP_Rise: @Shrapnel77 still planned, not near completion, they will be up next after winter release I believe

applepear1337: @CCP_Fozzie @CCP_Rise Still no awnser when shield slaves finally coming. We need them!!
CCP_Rise: @applepear1337 I don’t know exactly apple but I asked the folks who would know and I’m waiting to hear back 🙂

derpotsito: CCP_Rise: with the influx of carrier, supercarrier, and titan pilots do we need to start looking at T2 supers/titans to help balance out the meta?
CCP_Rise: @derpotsito that sounds like a scary strategy heh

cowkillereve: @ccp_rise why have u nerfed or excluded any love to the hunter tengu? What will solo blops people do who do not wish to be part of the massive alliances? U effectively have killed the solo play as well as killing the small public gangs like BB and spectres
CCP_Rise: @cowkillereve don’t think that is intended, we will have to do a lot of looking at the state of t3c after they are released and make changes to try and preserve roles like that if needed, but lets see what actually happens first

AccidentalGamer: @CCP_Rise have you seen the recent reddit suggestion about using mobile siphon units to drain fuel from POSs? what are your thoughts on this?
CCP_Rise: @AccidentalGamer I haven’t seen it but I’ll try and find it

JayAmazingness: @CCP_Rise I know its not your department but please give factions supers and titans a unique hull model – otherwise you are paying 280b for basically the same old ereboos
CCP_Rise: @JayAmazingness yeah that’s a tough one, we would love to have that but capital models are extremely costly and we want those art resources to go somewhere that lots of pilots can enjoy, though I do think I saw some angel capital concepts somewhere…..

Miraclebutt: @CCP_Rise I’m interested in module and upcoming ship balance. Is there going to be a new focus for CCP on doing more regular ship and module balance passes in the future?
CCP_Rise: @Miraclebutt yes, we’re dedicating most of my team’s bandwidth to ships and modules starting very soon so hopefully there will be more balance and more new ships and modules

RenamedUser8675309: @CCP_Rise CCP’s response to the Q&A was that of someone hearing about a problem for the first time. Most of these issues were brought up before these features left Sisi. The delay is what concerns me the most. See – Ghost Training
CCP_Rise: @RenamedUser8675309 ghost training was a special kind of slow and we are changing internal processes so that doesn’t happen again

TressedOut: @CCP_Rise I really hope the constant negativity about changes and direction really do not get you guys discouraged. People seem to understand that you cannot just shoehorn in an update like most MMO’s. Since assets from 6 years ago can still have a large effect on the economy.
CCP_Rise: @TressedOut thanks 🙂 we try to stay positive

Green_Shade: @CCP_Rise I think it would be easier if you would try to answer the questions on the forums
CCP_Rise: @Green_Shade yeah forums or even an AMA might be a good idea

Arrendis: @CCP_Rise thank you for taking the time to engage with us and answer questions, by the way. I know a lot of folks are frustrated there wasn’t more active Q&A from the studio, but we appreciate what you’re doing.
CCP_Rise: @Arrendis no prob, we didn’t mean to be evasive on the stream, we just also didn’t want to spend 20 minutes on stream saying things we’ve said elsewhere or that we can’t comment on yet :/

Pyroboat: @CCP_Rise are you fine with t3c hull cost being 650 mil higher for over 80 mil SP pilot than under 50 mil SP pilot? (due injector mechanics)
CCP_Rise: @Pyroboat yes… but we have been taking a look at the diminishing returns scale and changes to that may come up at some point

Wakkachu: @CCP_Rise how much work will your team create for the art dept?
CCP_Rise: @Wakkachu I hope a lot 🙂

anat120: @CCP_Rise when are you going to fix industry tax in citadels
CCP_Rise: @anat120 sorry anat I’m not on the team with citadels so I don’t know much about that, what’s broken about it?

anat120: @CCP_Rise the tax is being applied to system index cost instead of item value
CCP_Rise: @anat120 ahhh yes. CCP_nagual has actually a proposal for changing that. I’m not sure what the timeline looks like but we know it’s an issue

crackon111: any chance of including some Valkyrie info and updates into the o7 show
CCP_Rise: @crackon111 that might be possible, maybe send a mail to the community team and ask if they would be up for doing that kind of thing

Aaosoth: @ccp_rise Are you planning any discussion or blog posts about what your teams plans or goals?
CCP_Rise: @Aaosoth we will be doing that once folks are back from vacation and we settle into our own agenda a little more, then we will come to you guys and discuss roadmap and priorities

PodSlot: @CCP_Rise Have you considered applying resistance bonuses depending on Wormhole, nullsec, lowsec, or highsec for T3C balance?
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot no, not as part of the t3c rebalance, but we have talked about more environment specific effects like that. Maybe something for the future

BisnessPirate: @CCP_Rise people general see Void bombs and the spammability of Astrahuses as the most broken parts, specificall that they also take 3 bashes over a whole week.
CCP_Rise: @BisnessPirate yes, I believe void bombs will be one of the first things to get changed

EVELog: when are we getting Factional Warfare fixed please?
CCP_Rise: @EVELog I see you, I don’t have an answer for you. We have wanted to do another round of rework on FW for some time and it almost made it high enough on priority for this release cycle but not quite. Sorry I can’t say when it will happen

cowkillereve: @ccp_rise so what is your over all goal with t3c n the end? And ATM until things are “fixed” which takes ccp a Lot of time in general what do u expect us to use? Or what can we as a community do to show u how this change effects a great many players in a negative way??
CCP_Rise: @cowkillereve overall goal is to have more balanced representation of all the different configurations and a less oppressive role in the meta generally

PodSlot: @CCP_Rise Thanks.. I been testing T3C on sisi.. still so many better options for running C3 wormhole sites after patch then risking a T3C for Solo.. For being SLeeper Wormhole tech it seams exteramly underpowered and a two much concept then application
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot okay that’s good feedback, I’ll pass it along

Lestermination: Goal of T3C was to let the art team make skins for them, that’s it
CCP_Rise: @Lestermination that’s not true of course, but it was important for the art team to redo the modularity implementation so that it would be less overhead for us to continue to maintain them, skins are just a bonus we get out of doing that work

maklinstanks: @CCP_Rise why alpha clone can used strip miner I but there is no ship that wood allow it to be put on?
CCP_Rise: @maklinstanks are you sure there isn’t one that can use it? I remember the CSM asking specifically to have that skill added but I can’t remember why

Maxdeltaa: @CCP_Rise Thank you ccp for all the content you provide. I think I speak for most when I ask, When will Exotic Dancers be a view able NPC in our stations
CCP_Rise: @Maxdeltaa we do have a mature audience anyway, I’ll put a pitch together

xXxCREECHERxXx: @ccp_rise any word on shield slaves or the state or shield supercapital and capitals? ie do you all see any issues with it or do you like where its at?
CCP_Rise: @xXxCREECHERxXx apparently shield slaves were meant to be in the next patch but the same team had to do emergency balance work on carriers so it felt back unfortunately

nazzarus: @CCP_Rise I know it’s not your area currently, but I’d like to suggest pirate faction warfare be something that is looked into for nul content generation.
CCP_Rise: @nazzarus that sounds interesting, how would you see that working?

Grif419: @CCP_Rise is there a way that ship SKINS could be set for a corporation and/or alliance? It would be cool to see a fleet of ships flying the same colors, IMO.
CCP_Rise: @Grif419 yes, we love that idea and are working towards it, hopefully not too long in the future

PodSlot: @CCP It would be kind of cool if on SISI each player had his own system J_PLayerName .. and in that system he could edit any ship stat he wanted to help craft better game balance.
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot that sounds extremely complicated to make but it would be awesome to see what people figured out

Tomato_Saucebot: @CCP_Rise I am bored of mindless “gudfites”. Are there any plans for new objectives to fight over (like old static 2/10s)?
CCP_Rise: @Tomato_Saucebot yeah, there are ideas, the blood raider ship yard was a narrow but good example. look for more stuff like that, probably coming out first through events where we can test without having to commit to the game long term
CCP_Rise: if we find good stuff through events then we can move into a permenant place hopefully

zaaidoc: @CCP_Rise are there any upcoming new PvE sort of scenarios in the pipeline accessible to the solo player rather than huge bloodraider shipyards or different than current anomalies or signatures
CCP_Rise: @zaaidoc yes, I can’t talk about them in detail but absolutely

cptbooniecrab: @CCP_Rise is there a patch planned for fixing cloaky campers like maybe a new probe type to scan them down or a timer on how long you can be cloak its one of the few things in the game that there is no counter to
CCP_Rise: @cptbooniecrab cloaky campers is always a tough question – I think when the structure team gets to working on observatories and other intel focused structures we will reevalute cloaky camping and see if we want to make changes, which means sometime early next year I guess

AlongStoryps2: @CCP_Rise What about having Rats spawn for anoms in null for supers… which warp scram the supers/carriers and need to be killed etc to increase risk with supers and decrease isk from supers
AlongStoryps2: CCP_Rise are there any plans to make Null rat anoms more difficult depending on what you bring to kill the rats ?
CCP_Rise: @AlongStoryps2 there aren’t plans to change null anoms specifically at the moment but we are developing more dynamic content and tools for making it and if that goes well then eventually we may be able to apply it to anoms and missions and other content

DrakkonRaa: @CCP_Rise – Are you planing to return pictures on the character sheet? Instead of them we have animated forehead. Another question – when will you fix the skill list and skill queue. The previous one was more intuitive and convenient – Please redesign both to vertical layout
CCP_Rise: @DrakkonRaa no plans that I know of, we really like the animated forehead. Sorry to hear you don’t. I’m not sure about the skill queue section though, we look at improving that often but I don’t think there’s any immediately plans for change

nazzarus: @ccp thanks guys for manning up this chat and answering questions.
CCP_Rise: @nazzarus my pleasure

t1tanstrong: @CCP_Rise Have there been considerations of a losec moon mining platform that is automated when the rest become unautomated to generate content?
CCP_Rise: @t1tanstrong I’m not sure about automated for players but we have talked about giving them to NPCs as a way to generate content… we’ll see

TFSyth: @CCP_Rise are there plans to allow the pheonix/Levi use XL rail/blaster guns?
CCP_Rise: @TFSyth no I don’t think so. we talked about that as a way of getting out from under the complication of missiles but now that we went with missles I don’t think we will give them hybrids

PodSlot: @CCP_Rise Can players install Agents in Citadels that buy items using a corp wallet.. It would be cool to setup a corp mission system using agents
PodSlot: Example the agent could buy Moon Minerals at a Medium citadel without needing a Market hub
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot yeah we love this idea but a lot of the function can be handled by contracts so it may need to wait until a contract rework of some kind

PodSlot: @CCP_Rise Yes.. I tried doing this with contracts in a wormhole and it was a pain in the ass… if I just had a agent that purchased like 5 or 6 items from a corp wallet it would make things so much easier
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot okay good to know

mahicanmoe: @CCP_Rise why have you nerfed Rorquals so much (which finally made all of the miners happy, before the nearfs of course) Why instead you have not increased a demand for ore and minerals by providing new lines of ships, t2 dreads, t3 battlecruisers, new faction line of ships, new modules and so on .. and why you hadnt had a plan about it upfront as it was obvious what is going to happen?
CCP_Rise: @mahicanmoe you’re right. we are looking a lot now at trying to improve demand side for resources. that’s a big part of why this ship and module team is coming together. it’s just difficult to develop new demand to match new generation at the same time in all cases and I think we underestimated the production from rorquals at release

RenamedUser8675309: @CCP_Rise Any chance we’ll see a T2 BS similar in design to HACs?
CCP_Rise: @RenamedUser8675309 almost certainly no, HACs are one of the hardest classes to balance and I don’t think we want a bigger version of that

CCP_Rise: @Miraclebutt hmm, probably nothing overarching to all of them. they just have bizarre and unique math for application that makes it a special task to handle capital scale versions – we do want to keep looking at balance of course but on an individual level, like with RLML only or something, it’s not quite as complicated

mahicanmoe: @CCP_Rise You will need to change sov or in any other way make wars more frequent as current state of things makes huge accumulation of welt which can be dangerous for the game itself
CCP_Rise: @mahicanmoe agreed, we are always trying to figure out how to increase conflict and change. it’s hard to get right every time though

furykano: @CCP_Rise will you change wormhole content in future?
CCP_Rise: @furykano yes I think so, but I don’t have any specific plans I can tell you about

Vari_online: @CCP_Rise will we see a assault frigate change?
CCP_Rise: @Vari_online definitely at some point

Joshfryguy: @CCP_Rise Do you think moon mining will generate more content in lowsec? Is that your goal? Do you see ‘old money’ moons finally going to small corps and organizations?
CCP_Rise: @Joshfryguy I don’t really have an answer on that since I’m not on the structure team. I’m sure the hope is that there will be new content but I don’t know about their expectations for specific regions or sec bands

Pyroboat: @CCP_Rise Is it intended that the new ship balance team is able to make number changes (ie, launcher damage reduced by x%) on a much faster pace than we have seen previously?
CCP_Rise: @Pyroboat partly yes, but it’s also to be able to take on more ‘new’ things like unique mechanics which require programmers and in the past would have been difficult for the balance design team to do alone

mahicanmoe: @CCP_Rise make one region some big alliance owns something all will want and change the sov and I think you will be on your way :))) Cheers
CCP_Rise: @mahicanmoe changing the sov is the tricky part but we will keep trying to improve it

abkilleroutamon: in 3 months will the AC cynabal be a viable kite platform?
CCP_Rise: @abkilleroutamon when I read that question for some reason in my head it said ‘will the AC cynabal be a vertical kite platform’ and now i realize how much I want a vertical cynabal. don’t know the answer to your actual quesiton though 🙂 it’s possible, I think medium ACs are a likely candidate for an alpha-oriented balance pass

eagleeyezFTTB: make a new race 🙂 and a new region
CCP_Rise: @eagleeyezFTTB I would love that. I even have a plan for it

Miraclebutt: @CCP_Rise Aah, makes sense, thank you. Now that you bring up RLMLs, have you thought about bringing that concept to other weapon types, i.e. dual 180mm autocannons on a Rupture being an equivalent “antisupport” weapon with high tracking but low damage thoroughput?
CCP_Rise: @Miraclebutt we did talk about that at some point, doing a burst version for turrets, I think we backed off from it because balance is so hard when DPS numbers go really high, even for a burst

abkilleroutamon: what does alpha-oriented balance pass actually mean?
CCP_Rise: @abkilleroutamon it just means a balance pass that focuses on ships and modules available to alpha players (frigs/dessie/cruiser with non-t2 weapons) – for example not having scorch is an issue that would be good to deal with for alphas

ChainsawPlankton: great, now I want a 3-5 round burst turret
CCP_Rise: @ChainsawPlankton it’s okay but there’s room to improve. especially for minmatar and amarr. hopefully we can start sharing a plan for improving it pretty soon

Tomato_Saucebot: @CCP_rise AT ship rebalance when? #FrekiLivesMatter
CCP_Rise: @Tomato_Saucebot rough life, I wish I had a frekki

ChainsawPlankton: would you say that is more due to skill constraints or ship/mod balancing. For example everyone seems to love the vexor, and the arbitrator is very similar yet hardly used
CCP_Rise: @ChainsawPlankton it’s both. arbitrator is similar but kind of worse at everything unless you are making use of the ewar, vexor too good

RenamedUser8675309: @CCP_Rise Amarr Alphas desperately need some love to be able to fly in shield fleets. Currently, it’s almost impossible to fit Amarr Alphas in shield comps
CCP_Rise: @RenamedUser8675309 yeah, really good point, kind of hard to fix but I’m sure we can make it a bit easier

Joshfryguy: @CCP_Rise Do you ever play the game for the sake of playing it? What other games do you play?
CCP_Rise: @Joshfryguy yes definitely, also play pubg like everyone else because its awesome, i’ll always play eve though as well

t1tanstrong: @CCP_Rise I know that it was said more Q+A sessions will happen, but can we get a solid commitment. Old players appreciate when people are there to listen, regardless of what happens.

Arrendis: @CCP_Rise pursuant to the shield super issues @applepear1337 and @JayAmazingness raised, how would you feel about restoring the passive resistance bonuses to the Adaptive Invulnerability fields? Do you think that would be unbalancing?
CCP_Rise: @Arrendis I’m not sure about fully restoring but bringing back some of the passive element could work I’m sure

abkilleroutamon: thought the alpha accounts could not fly cynabals… anyway.. just make falloff 25% then i will be happy
CCP_Rise: @abkilleroutamon they can’t fly cynabals but if we changed medium ACs for alpha ruptures and stabbers it would help your cynabal

Tomato_Saucebot: @CCP_Rise what’s the issue with RLMLs that the upcoming nerf will solve?
CCP_Rise: @Tomato_Saucebot they are op

Tomato_Saucebot: @CCP_Rise right, but what about them is OP that the upcoming change will fix?
CCP_Rise: @Tomato_Saucebot don’t have a sure answer for you. Seems like some players/csm think range is the biggest issue and we would only need to change that, I think internally we still think they are just too efficient in terms of damage, even including the reload time

RenamedUser8675309: @CCP_Rise I may be a salty bittervet, but thanks for answering my questions zarO7
CCP_Rise: @TFSyth that isn’t figured out yet but it will all be incorporated somehow with new structures. look for plans on that happening sometime around new years

PodSlot: Hey.. Why does the battleship XL guns take XL ammo when the Phonex take regular size Torps.. that always didn’t make sence for the dreads
JayAmazingness: podslot brings up a good issue, there are a lot of problems with rapid torps mostly range and application
CCP_Rise: @PodSlot after 15 years of dev we accumulate quite a bit of weird inconsistency like that. you’re right it doesn’t make sense

TFSyth: @CCP_Rise so after refineries are deployed and no “Oh God we killed T2 Mats Market” event?
CCP_Rise: @TFSyth definitely after

furykano: @CCP_Rise Will we be able to change nickname for isks in future?
CCP_Rise: @furykano maybe! we almost went for that a year ago but it’s pretty tricky to do. Need to make sure people can’t use it to hide or steal identity or any other exploit type things, but it might be a good change

Miraclebutt: I dunno, missiles in general feel like a very… braindead weapon? When they’re good, they’re very good. When they’re bad, nobody uses them. It’s tough to get that middle ground.
CCP_Rise: @Miraclebutt I don’t know about braindead. I like that you get to manage positioning much differently as a missile user than a turret user. And balance right now, though not perfect, is in a pretty good place compared to the old days, with rlml being the biggest stand out I think

okarasrule: @CCP_Rise do you think giving the orca strip miners rather than drones would be possable?
CCP_Rise: @okarasrule hmm not sure, interesting though, I’ll bring it up with other balance designers

Vari_online: @CCP_Rise do you think your team will be jumping from ship to ship for updates or are you guys going to take it ship size by ship size?
CCP_Rise: @Vari_online not sure yet! I hope we can do whole classes or module groups at a time rather than ships 1 by 1 but I also hope we can be very flexible and fast so if we want to just make a change to one specific ship we are able to quickly

yossarianupnorth: @CCP_Rise with the recent nerf to carriers, can you tell us if a similar one is in the works for VNI / Ishtars please?
CCP_Rise: @yossarianupnorth no plans this second, though I do think we want to take a look at them. the scale of the problem is very different though. the carrier income was going to a much smaller group of players while VNI income is spread across a huge huge portion of the player base, which just means we need to approach it a bit differently I think

JayAmazingness: @CCP_Rise any plans to buff assault frigates so they arent overshadowed by t3ds
CCP_Rise: @JayAmazingness no but that sounds pretty cool

Tomato_Saucebot: @CCP_Rise have you considered heavily increasing the fitting cost of RLMLs instead? The biggest problem with RLMLs right now is the ability to fix maximum tank while being able effectively “box”. If RLML fits had to make sacrifices similar to artillery, they would no longer be able to brawl other cruisers, but still excel at their intended role as anti-support
CCP_Rise: @Tomato_Saucebot yes, I actually love that idea, it breaks a lot of consistency with other weapons though where smaller charges = less fitting – I still think it might be the most interesting path forward though
CCP_Rise: rather than just nerfing it down to being not as good, give it some big tradeoff

Finally, though, the pace of questions trickled off, and…

CCP_Rise: ALRIGHT SEEMS LIKE IT’S SLOWING DOWN A LOT SO I’M GOING TO GO BACK TO WORK

 

Let your voice be heard! Submit your own article to Imperium News here!

Would you like to join the Imperium News staff? Find out how!

Comments

  • Arrendis

    Rise was a real champ, staying around that long after the ‘official’ Q&A was done. Hopefully the next time there’s a Q&A, it’ll actually involve a Q&A.

    July 10, 2017 at 10:44 pm
    • Dirk MacGirk Arrendis

      yeah, can’t blame Rise. AMAs probably work better for that sort of thing anyway.

      July 11, 2017 at 2:15 am
      • Arrendis Dirk MacGirk

        Seriously, all they needed to do was say ‘here’s a forum thread for questions. Put your questions in this weekend, and we’ll post a devblog with the responses on Monday afternoon’.

        July 11, 2017 at 2:47 am
  • Pew Pew

    It’s interesting to hear CCP talk about the winter expansion. I hope legacy code being mostly fixed is true because my confidence in them is pretty low right now. I don’t have confidence they can create meaningful new features and then actually follow through on them so they are enduring, solid and deep.

    July 10, 2017 at 11:18 pm
    • Yuna Pew Pew

      Don’t know if that statement is true or not, about the legacy code. My faith in what they tell us and my experience range quite wildly. And today just kinda solidified that experience. When I wake up in the middle of sleeping to watch a live 20 min dev blog vs an expected 1-2 hour Q&A.

      July 11, 2017 at 3:28 am
  • Kael Decadence

    When I first saw that they were doing a live Q&A on stream, I was really excited. I made sure I could block my lunch out to watch it, thinking it would be lengthy. Boy was I wrong. They really should have just called it a live dev blog, because that’s exactly what it was.

    July 11, 2017 at 12:42 am
  • Dirk MacGirk

    Thanks for parsing and posting the AMA Rise conducted afterwards. Much better than watching the chat itself.

    July 11, 2017 at 2:17 am
  • Rhivre

    Observatory Arrays on the timeline now 😀

    July 11, 2017 at 7:16 am
    • Pew Pew Rhivre

      What interesting gameplay do you think they will provide?

      July 11, 2017 at 8:42 am
      • Rhivre Pew Pew

        They are the ones which had the description of:
        “Service module possibilities: Being able to increase, decrease or block Star Map filters in the solar systems they’re deployed, act as solar system wide D-scan blockers, disrupt ship intelligence in the solar system, take over player tracking capabilities from NPC agents or be able to affect or pinpoint cloak users. We are considering basing their effectiveness through a network coverage (like cell phones) so that a single one may not be that useful, but maintaining a bunch of them in space could give a significant advantage.”

        So, plenty of possibilities for gameplay options.

        July 11, 2017 at 9:55 am
        • Pew Pew Rhivre

          I’m worried that, a year after release, it’ll just be one more chore for the logistics bros to deploy.

          July 11, 2017 at 12:22 pm
  • Alaric Faelen

    “With a more active, and engaging high-sec, new players will have more activities to keep them engaged in the game, and playing”

    –And even more players will squat forever in high sec and never contribute to the rest of the game. Any increase in high sec content needs to come with an increase in high sec risk and competition- including the PvP variety. CCP needs to blur the lines between the classifications of space, and blur the lines between PvP and PvE.
    Eve is so stratified at this point it is basically a half dozen different games trying to run on a single engine. There is very little overlap between them, and what overlap exists usually favors one side so heavily that it only serves to anger the other side and further stratify the player base. It’s been a long time since it felt like we were all playing a game together, and now everyone has their niche that they believe should be the priority above all else.

    July 11, 2017 at 2:25 pm
  • hurf

    Thanks for the good coverage dudes, more informative than the stream.

    July 12, 2017 at 12:04 pm