|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 53 post(s) |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
90
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 12:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
I think what a lot of people are trying to say is this is about 'Tone.' The tone of this new system contrasts sharply with all existing content and that can make something jarring and unpleasant.
For me personally it's more about lack of depth and discovery. Odyssey's presentation at fanfest and it's own web page pitched it as exploration and moving away from combat sites, ship switching and sitting waiting for the module to hack a can. The new system does achieve those things but still doesn't feel like exploration. Hacking is good but feels out of place here and especially out of place in archaeology/relic sites, where it's a reskin of hacking rather than a skill of it's own.
I read this...
Odyssey Web page wrote:EVE Online's nineteenth free expansion, Odyssey, offers new tools for exploring the stars, challenges you to breach the unknown for adventure and rewards, and to face what lies on the other side. A re-imagined scanning system, intuitive navigation and new exploration modules will aid you as you search the heavens for your next conquest. Some will encounter sites never discovered before, and others will be confronted with intriguing tests of skill and resolve. Ample rewards await those that return from their journeys with ships intact.
I expect something else. I know it's not any fault of the dev teams as I doubt one of you wrote that, but there it is.
'A re-imagined scanning system' is more of a change to the existing scanner system than a re-imagining, a good change but still just a change.
'Some will encounter sites never discovered before' they seem to be the same or very similar sites with three pieces of additional art assets added (looked up the models with TriExporter, two types of data hubs and an Ancient Battleship derelict, there is an intact version but as far as I know it's not used).
'Breach the unknown' we don't seem to be finding anything unknown as they are all labelled as pirate faction anomalies and pirate rats spawn at them. The loot is existing items (except some newer datacore variations) and even the junk loot is existing junk items.
Overall it's a good system for making Isk, getting certain items and as a spring board for future features and content.
The real problem is mine (and the explorer community's) for letting expectations cloud reality and what is feasible. I've been waiting for exploration to get attention again since Apocrypha and you never could have lived up to my wild dreams of wonder and adventure. Sorry for that. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 16:37:00 -
[2] - Quote
What I would have liked Archaeology to be like...
You discover something and scan it
Which leads to...
Using science and industry skills to study it a narrow down other linked sites
so you...
Fly there and discover more clues
which then goes to...
More exploration of New Eden's history
and so on and so on, until...
The reulting data and notes from your search are turned into factions, thus leading to rewards, knowledge and a feeling of accomplishment
Added future features...
Incarna lab to study discoveries
and...
Cartography room to view results and plan your next move.
(Thanks to CCP, Bioware, Square-Enix and Relic for some of the art) I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 20:47:00 -
[3] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:There is another reason to be active in a feedback thread other than caring about the feedback. Its to make it look like you care so you can wave a "We Care!" flag.
How to tell the difference? By what actually gets deployed on June 4th. If its the same features as were on Sisi, then we know you are here "asking for input" for the one and only purpose of shutting people up, and you place zero value on the opinions of your customers. If the features have been changed to reflect the feedback we gave, then you are right and you are respecting to what we have to say and assuming it is important enough to change what you do.
Remember: We watch what you do, not what you say.
Okay, first, that's a real creepy post right there. Second, They have only a week before Odyssey's launch, what do you want them to do? I've said before, I'll say again, accurate feedback won't come until they release it on TQ and have a larger sample size.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 20:49:00 -
[4] - Quote
Scuzzy Logic wrote:You know, THIS is what I was expecting. Sure, the hacking minigame isn't all bad. (The pinata, however, IS.) I'd expect this to be how Archaeology should function. It would make RPers much more heppy, too. it's to bad you didn't make this your CSM platform, I'd have liquidated anyone who'd have run against you for free because of how much I like the idea.
But, I suspect then only you and I would be playing the game.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 21:25:00 -
[5] - Quote
Raven Solaris wrote:Most of this feedback has been being posted all month. A month? No way, has it been that long since it hit Sisi? Or do you mean it's showing at fanfest... that's about a month ago right?
Anyway, it's only a week now, so asking for a radical change to happen in that time seems unfair.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 21:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
People outside this thread still seem upbeat about it, Massively
Make of it what you will. Cough 'more user-friendly controls' cough excuse me bad cough I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 21:54:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kahns wrote:Naomi Hale wrote:People outside this thread still seem upbeat about it, Massively Seriously... you know it's great and people love it because of a preview?
It was supposed to be sarcasm (forums need a sarcasm button or font or something). I didn't mean everyone was upbeat but the author of that article certainly is (or paid to be). You seem overly confrontational... perhaps some calming tea or deep slow breaths?
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 22:10:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kahns wrote:Naomi Hale wrote:Anyway, it's only a week now, so asking for a radical change to happen in that time seems unfair.
Fixing this doesn't require radical change in a week. I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Things CCP could do, off the top of my head:
- Take out having to move to get the cans (aka, how it was described at fanfest)
- get rid of loot pinatas and you get the loot if you solve the hacking within two tries
- delay just the hacking minigame and cans for changes and leave the old sites for now (people would get over it, it's a free expansion)
- Make the cans simply appear around you like old cans, you have to access them like old cans before they explode on a timer
- delay the expansion (CCP only publishes quality and all that)
- ship it as is but detail planned fixes and not just abandon the feature for some new winter theme
I'm not saying that all of these are great options, but saying that the only way to fix the problems brought up is to make radical changes in a week is a straw man argument. Removing the 'Pinata' is a radical change, time and effort have gone into designing and creating it and your asking them to throw it out before the majority of the player base have tried it. Players that treat EVE as a casual game, rather than invested in it like 'a second job'.
Look, I'm disappointed about the new exploration stuff, but I also know that expecting what I want to overrule the game's designers, programmers, artists and animators is unrealistic compared to the (potentially) thousands of players on TQ that may end up liking it.
If, in a months time, we see a mass exodus of players from the game because of these features then feel free to send me an 'I told you so' eve-mail.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
92
|
Posted - 2013.05.28 22:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kahns wrote:Naomi Hale wrote:If, in a months time, we see a mass exodus of players from the game because of these features then feel free to send me an 'I told you so' eve-mail.
You loooooooove the strawman arguments But of course! He's my favourite character from 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' as I too lack a brain
But the straw man argument being that a lot of people on this thread want the 'Pinata' loot removed? Yes I think I was addressing that. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
98
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 06:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
J3ssica Alba wrote:Do want. Gief nao. Why aren't you working for CCP ? Thanks. I think it's because there is a massive difference between making designed content and some quick mock-ups in photoshop.
Brooks Puuntai wrote:Actually quite mad I overlooked that post. That is how it should be, however it seems too complex for CCP to be willing to do. Since CCP has given up being innovative it seems.
Davion Falcon wrote:Now this sounds friggin ace right here. Thanks
CCP Affinity wrote:Hi,
This feedback thread is for the hacking and archaeology sites by Team Prototype Rocks - keep feedback on the scattering mechanic, site layout, hacking minigame please :)
We have taken your feedback on board and made some changes to the pace of the feature and the loot amounts within the scattering. It would be great to get your feedback on the updated version on SISI - both from the mass test today and from playing the sites yourselves.
Please keep the feedback constructive and give specific examples/suggestions to help us fully understand any concerns you may have. Bit off topic.
Could we get a practise hacking panel in the Captain's Quarters, no rewards, just maybe flicker the light or a message from station maintenance to 'stop doing that'. I'd like playing it as a game, like that strategy game that was shown for Incarna. (How do you add big puppy dog eyes to a forum post?)
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
|
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
103
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:17:00 -
[11] - Quote
Castelo Selva wrote:For the love of Gods, please apply to work for CCP! And please post it on the features & Ideas. I will direct everyone that I know to support it!
Forward this to all CSM members! Let-¦s start the revolution!!!
F&I Re-post
Like I said, it's how I'd like it to be in an ideal world, but I think feasibility and practicality stop something like it being made. I'm also unsure the idea could be justified over already present features needing attention. Fleshing out the likes of PI, Epic Missions, EVE Lore, Incarna and the new hacking feature would however lead to something like my idea being more realistic. So we need to be patient.
I'm not an expert on the system, but I think a scrum based development model stops some of the more widespread features and ideas from being added or made in EVE as the small teams are tightly focused on their goals (not a bad thing). That said, CCP Seagull did give the impression of a more cross team communication and collaboration of goals and a more epic scope for EVE's future, so it's looking good.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
103
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 12:26:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Naomi Hale wrote:Could we get a practise hacking panel in the Captain's Quarters, no rewards, just maybe flicker the light or a message from station maintenance to 'stop doing that'. I'd like playing it as a game, like that strategy game that was shown for Incarna. (How do you add big puppy dog eyes to a forum post?) Put it on the door access panel? More seriously yes we can do that but won't for at least this first release. The Hacking system itself is entirely independent of the object being hacked so we can add hacking to literally anything in EVE. Although we should make the mechanic deeper first. I also like the idea for Archaeology. The door panel would indeed be cruel, especially if you successfully hacked it and it then said "well done!... I'm still not gonna open though."
Good to know hacking is flexible in where it can be placed. The possibilities for the future hehehe
And thanks.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
One of the ideas I had for Archaeology was a new skill, 'Iconography', used for studying cultural objects you discovered.
I'm thinking it (or something similar) could be repurposed for the hacking game. Allowing you to decipher markings and obscure languages on the hulls of hacking and relic objects, as I imagine spaceships and stations have labels for access panels and data terminals, indicating their function. Increasing levels of the skill could provide hints to possible locations of defences, cores and utilities found during hacking. Each level adds a one node radius to detection of active nodes but not what type it is...
This could add that layer of strategy some people have wanted. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:11:00 -
[14] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Sharing with you the awesome abomination that i used to run null sec sites last night: http://i.imgur.com/zzsBLLI.jpgThat's the future of exploration right there. A new ship for a new generation.
How'd you get a Covert-Op cloak on a Noctis? Aren't they limited to covert ships?
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
106
|
Posted - 2013.05.29 13:16:00 -
[15] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Naomi Hale wrote: How'd you get a Covert-Op cloak on a Noctis? Aren't they limited to covert ships?
It's a Tengu. That's just the name of the fit
Ah, I see it now... oops
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
110
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 00:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote:I understand that people are mad about that, but I feel that that's something for them to get over and start treating like a challenge. If loot values are still too low, they can be tweaked a bit. EVE isn't supposed to be easy. Not trolling, Genuinely curious. Aren't you, as a CSM, supposed to represent the people? That statement seems counterintuitive.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
113
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote:It is mathematically impossible for me to represent all the players, and the people who have issues with the spew are so effectively representing yourselves in this thread Given that, I must state my honest and genuine perspective for which I was elected, having marked it with my prior relevant history in similar tasks and disclaimed any representation of the majority (and yes, I realize most of my campaign was run on NPE-- I've given *that* feedback on this feature too, and not all of it was nice). I've spent hours testing this, partly on the urging of the players, and I've given feedback other places than this.
mynnna wrote:Yes, I'm here to represent the players. Of course, I'm allowed to think for myself as well, and I rather liked the notion of things that you actually have to cooperate with others to leverage to their fullest potential. So, if (as in this case) I believe people are being spoiled little whiners, stamping their feet and demanding ALL THE THINGS, I'm going to tell them as much. I understand that you can't represent everyone and that you are allowed to express your own opinion even if (and sometimes especially because) it contradicts some players. My issue was more with the wording and tone of the post.
Ali Aras wrote:I understand that people are mad about that, but I feel that that's something for them to get over and start treating like a challenge. If loot values are still too low, they can be tweaked a bit. EVE isn't supposed to be easy. This seems to acknowledge that some players have issues with the new feature and then literally tells them to 'get over' it. Where as something like...
Ali Aras could have wrote:I feel that this should be treated like a challenge. If loot values are still too low, they can be tweaked a bit. EVE isn't supposed to be easy.
Seems less confrontational.
It's all about PR and spin, you're a politician now, I'm afraid this is stuff you need to consider. But at least you didn't refer to people as 'spoiled little whiners' I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
113
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 04:45:00 -
[18] - Quote
Telrei wrote:I don't usually like to double post but it just came to me....
This is the emergency nerf....
Someone suddenly realized that if you added the new mini-game people would go after EVERY hacking site in the game to try it out....
The entire market would be flooded with the onset of new and old people who never gave a hoot about hacking or just did it from time to time and now suddenly enmass are trying it...
Rather then pulling the plug this late in the iteration you needed a balance....
You knew that most people run hacking/arch sites solo so you added the can spew in to make sure that the VAST amount of people who used to run hacking would still stay away... As I have said before if I try and get someone to help they will say don't waste your time on that hacking site come mine/plex/mission. et....
You keep the solo players in check because most will stop running and the market will remain unflooded....
Well played... you have succeeded on this until the next iteration where the can spew is magically gone and replaced with one if not multiple of the ideas listed that will take much much longer to code and balance....
But aren't the number of sites spawned still limited so the amount of loot that can make it onto the market is consistent, no matter how many players run these sites?
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
113
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 05:36:00 -
[19] - Quote
I want to clear up my position here as it does tend to get lost in posts and responses and moves off topic.
I have no problem with the spew can/pinata mechanic or any of the new hacking and scanning, it's all good, different and promotes some new co-op play, I think it achieves what it set out to do.
My issue is that it is focused too much on isk/hour, loot value and feels like just another way to make money in a game that already has lots of ways to make isk. Like a job where you need to maintain your level of productivity.
I wanted exploration, and archaeology in particular, to focus more on the discovery and story elements of EVE Online and to bridge the large gap between the in-game world and the lore rich website content, like Evelopdia, the chronicles, news reports and yes even the EVE books. I was looking forward to an activity in EVE that used some of the games excellent story and wasn't just a means to make money and fund player corps, wars and conflict.
Outside of the epic missions there isn't any story in EVE the isn't player driven or Corp politics. New Eden's in-game world feels static and unconnected to the events written about NPC actions. I didn't even notice Souro Foiritan had been out of office until I read 'Templar One'. Despite massive changes within the Armarr leadership out of game they still feel the same in-game.
I know EVE is a player driven sandbox, but if the story isn't important why is it there? Minecraft is a sandbox, has no story and is still an excellent game.
And I kind of hoped Odyssey was the beginning of bridging that gap and enriching the story of New Eden for players. That's why to me personally the new exploration is a good well designed activity to do in EVE Online, but it's not exploration.
If I could make but one change to the new content it would be that the relic sites with salvage loot use existing assets in space, but sites that actually have relics use the new Terran ship derelict and just the derelict (clouds and rocks are fine) so that there is a feel of finding something long forgotten and hidden. Nothing shatters that feeling quicker than finding an ancient ship and seeing it in space along side Empire station ruins, Pirate structures or any number of assets you've already seen running missions and complexes.. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
114
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 12:33:00 -
[20] - Quote
Rytell Tybat wrote:Great ideas! Depth and a bit of mystery all tied into the lore? This really puts CCP's version of archeology to shame. Would love to see something like this in-game.
Seth Asthereun wrote:This for archeology. Really you should hire him/her
Ruskarn Andedare wrote:I absolutely love your proposal there - it's close to what I was hoping for when I took up exploring. Thanks! Fingers crossed we get something like it in the future
Scuzzy Logic wrote:YOu'd be surprised. Many people came back to WoW just to play the Archaeology minigame profession even if it is long, tedious and less rewarding then doing dungeons just because they like it. It shames me greatly that I started playing WoW when they added the archaeology mini-game and after reaching max level with a paladin and completeing all the Archeology sets I left the game as it got really dull. Not gone back since, but I always come back to EVE. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
|
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
119
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 06:56:00 -
[21] - Quote
Ali Aras wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Destoya wrote:Please please reserve the +10 bonus for the specialized T2 ships. It should be +5 or +7.5. This theme of making T3 as good or better than specialized T2 ships does not fit with the original vision or promise of the ships and is counterproductive to balance.
Other than that, I like these changes a lot Lets not for get that covert ops frigates are much more nimble than a t3 and will be able to escape much faster. I don't want to say cost is balancing factor because it is not, but covert ops frigates are disposable. Tech 3s have nullification, which makes them impossible to catch at your standard gatecamp, even with highly skilled decloakers. When we see a tech3 jumping into the infamous 9-F0B2 permacamp, we often grumble about cloaky nulli being a thing that exists, spread out to 12km around the gate, and then watch it as it warps off into the distance. Cost balancing or not, flying a t3 is lower risk, and I agree with the thought that the +10s should be specialized ships only. +7 or +8 is a reasonable midpoint. What about a fixed role bonus for the frigates (+5 tech I, +10 tech II) and a subsystem skill bonus for the tech III's (+2 per level)? That way Tech III pilots are subject to the SP loss and need to invest time to train the skill to overshadow covert-ops frigates.
Flamespar wrote:Well CCP could introduce a module that you can fit to your ship that allows you to see the number of enemy nodes adjacent to your current node whilst hacking. I mentioned a skill based version of this here, but that skill could link into your module idea, so there'd be Tech I and Tech II versions.
Flamespar wrote:Some interesting additions that could be made to the derelict sites with further iterations.
- Loot should include some of the unreleased avatar clothing. - Audio logs that give insight into the original colonization of the EVE universe. - Relics from earth. Even better if these could be placed in your Captains Quarters. Love this! Though the cloths should be one run BPC as I don't wanna wear a 20'000 year old piece of space junk, but you could use the discovered design to recreate it. The relics scattered around the Captain's quarter's was something I meant to mention with regards to my Archaeology lab idea, that ongoing or private projects would be represented in the lab by artifacts and relics. (If you've ever played Mass Effect 2's Stolen memory DLC and seen Hock's vault, something like an Incarna version of that would blow my mind)
Audio logs I like as it adds story and a collection element to exploration.
I'm beginning to think that data sites should focus on profit and industry and relic sites should have bonus items, like you said, avatar add-ons, CQ items and audio/text logs, stuff that you can't or won't want to sell on the market. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
123
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 09:01:00 -
[22] - Quote
Sheena Tzash wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:Sheena Tzash wrote,
"The loot spillage affect to me is also very annoying simply because you put the work into getting this far to only get 10% of what your after - and most people won't be glad of the loot they got, they'll concern themselves with the stuff that they MISSED and so it'll seem like whenever you do exploration you'll LOSE something (or not gain 100%)"
If CCP do not understand this, they should hire any psychologist for half an hour, who will explain it to them.
My concern exactly. Even if this is considered to be a 'fun' mechanic (by the developers) the average player running the site won't feel like it because they would have missed out on something. I'm curious if your (and others) concern is for the missed items being something you need for manufacturing/invention or if it's solely about a deminshed isk/hour as you recieve less to sell on the market?
The first I could see myself getting mad at if you've searched and searched, then finally found it only for it to drift away, the second I'd be a little annoyed by but would take in stride as part of EVE.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
123
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 09:46:00 -
[23] - Quote
Sheena Tzash wrote:Naomi Hale wrote: I'm curious if your (and others) concern is for the missed items being something you need for manufacturing/invention or if it's solely about a deminshed isk/hour as you recieve less to sell on the market?
The first I could see myself getting mad at if you've searched and searched, then finally found it only for it to drift away, the second I'd be a little annoyed by but would take in stride as part of EVE.
A little bit of everything actually. - The old system you had 100% of the loot (even if this new system means you get roughly the same amount) - The hard work is finding the site in the first place; to have that 'reward' reduced because of some sort of 'cash grab' is annoying. - No other gameplay activity in EVE offers this 'partial' reward and so it feels like you'd be better off doing almost anything else where loot is 100% assured. Its like finding a site now and from 4 cans available only 2 of them have any loot. Its annoying because you feel like you've done all the activities that would normally give a reward and then not getting any. I will admit that its likely something that I will simply get used to and not think or care about as much; but my concern is more than a general reception of the idea is that you do 100% of the work and get 80% of the reward; it doesn't take a genius to find that is a bad deal..
But if a system (like CCP Bayesian described here) was added to let you chose the cans you want and so you knew the can you're letting get away is filled with carbon, datasheet or slavage you don't want, would you be more okay with the lose rather than getting 100% of the loot?
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
123
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 09:53:00 -
[24] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:For the people saying the 'loot pinata sucks' and the like could you vocalise the problems you have with it? Given the quote below CCP Bayesian needs to add an additional question.
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Checking in as (possibly) the only pilot on Singularity who does not feel the way described in the two posts above me. "For the people saying the 'loot pinata is good/fine' and the like could you vocalise the things you like about it? To know what not to change and counteract some of the threads negativity."
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:CCP Bayesian: Did you count concessions that it is not as unbearable as it was in its first iteration as positive?
I may have overlooked someone, but I did not see anyone that outright stated he preferred the spew containers over a regular container. (Minigame to open it aside)
I here by state that I prefer the new loot mechanic over the old static containers. There, that's a +1.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:38:00 -
[26] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Thinking a bit more about the Tengu virus bonus. If it was removed or nerfed i would defo use a t2 frig instead. Wouldn't want to risk losing a faction pos bpc because i didn't max out my hacking.
Would that really change a thing tho? I would then run the sites in a disposable frig that with some luck pays off from a single site and haul the loot back in a nullified Tengu that i've parked in a safe place somewhere meanwhile. That to me actualy sounds the most economicaly reasonable thing to do either way.
There did seem to be more of a "I can't kill a Tengu at my gatecamp or hacking site now, unfair" tone to their complaints. That said a skilled pilot can avoid any gatecamp in a Covert-ops Frigate, and the range of hacking modules and loot mechanic means a Frigate doesn't need to be within 2km of a loot can so can cloak when it wants. The only true edge the Tengu has is offensively and defensively it is better than a Covert-ops.
The way I see it is a covert-ops frigate is used by groups to find the sites and the other members of the group provide protection, keep an eye on d-scan/local and assist with looting, a Tech 3 ship isn't worth the risk if you've got friends that can protect a T2 Frigate and if they meet overwhelming odds it's lose won't hurt too bad (30 million isk fitted?). A Tengu is the ship for a solo explorer to feel a little safer in but faces a bigger lose in sp and isk if caught. Even a Tengu can't compensate for an unskiiled pilot in null. (500 million isk fitted?)
As I said back here if you give the Frigates fixed role bonuses to hacking they beat the Tengu as you'd get you're +10 virus strenght even at covert-ops level 1, but if the Tech 3 was per level (+2 virus strenght) you need to train to match the frigate and can lose that bonus with the ship.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 14:57:00 -
[27] - Quote
Solkara Starlock wrote:What I mean that it doesn't make sense is that if someone hacks into a computer or mainframe or whatever, the result of a succesfull hack is access to that computer or mainframe. Not triggering some exploding mechanic. That sounds more like triggering a defensive system to protect the content. I was working under the assumption that we were hacking an airlock release, delivery bay or access panel, and success exposed the contents to vacuum, blowing it out into space, failure locked the hatch and the system kicking you out.
I think we'd have little luck hacking a computer bigger than our ships, also blueprints and datacores are physical objects (disks, usb sticks, hard-drive etc), they need cargo space, we aren't copying the data to our ship's computer, are we?
But like I said, that was my assumption of what was occurring, it could be wrong.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 20:02:00 -
[28] - Quote
Okay, played some more Sisi and ran some relic sites. I'm still liking (learning to love) this new stuff, I only get about 40-50% loot and i ignore scarps/parts containers but even then I collected 110 million isk of loot in 2 low sec sites.
I am now sure of my earlier assumption (here). We are hacking/overriding airlocks and access ports. This makes the entire system far more enjoyable and realistic to me now. Removing the jettison mechanic would remove the feel of the derelict's contents being blown out into space.
On that note, I've found that if I close or minimize everything on the ui except the overview, hold 2500m from objects, assume hostiles are in system and navigate/interact with the new radial menu the experience is even better. Hats off to both dev teams on that combo. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 20:38:00 -
[29] - Quote
Scuzzy Logic wrote:Naomi Hale wrote:Solkara Starlock wrote:What I mean that it doesn't make sense is that if someone hacks into a computer or mainframe or whatever, the result of a succesfull hack is access to that computer or mainframe. Not triggering some exploding mechanic. That sounds more like triggering a defensive system to protect the content. I was working under the assumption that we were hacking an airlock release, delivery bay or access panel, and success exposed the contents to vacuum, blowing it out into space, failure locked the hatch and the system kicking you out. I think we'd have little luck hacking a computer bigger than our ships, also blueprints and datacores are physical objects (disks, usb sticks, hard-drive etc), they need cargo space, we aren't copying the data to our ship's computer, are we? But like I said, that was my assumption of what was occurring, it could be wrong. And it seems logical to you that a skilled hacker could not depressurize an unmanned (seriously they're data access terminals, why need an atmosphere) hangar and hook up his cargo bay to it? Or just point the magic beam directly in front of it as it opens? Hell, why can't I have my salvage drones bore a hole in the thing and go inside? Now if you FAIL your hacking attempt and just force the door to open like a script kiddie without depresurizing, then loot spew happening makes sense.
But now you're surpassing what is present in the game.
We don't know what system we are hacking (though it seems optimistic that we use a module and get access to the central computer), we don't know if data sites are unmanned (they are pirate facilities), we don't know where the loot jettison will come from or what direction it will go so can't 'hook up' our cargo bays.
We do know that the on-board micro-tractor beam can only handle one can at a time, so aiming it directly at the jettison point (if we knew it) wouldn't help. We do know that there is an effect of venting atmosphere accompanying the jettison. And we definitely know salvage drones can't breach hulls and we can't enter the structures (unless you mean enter with your ship, that would take your drones awhile to cut that hole).
As for 'skilled hackers' that is a wait an see. We can hack something at data sites and relics, but we don't gain control of the system, we stick a virus in the system core and destroy it (not an elegant hack). We are far from taking down Concord's computers, crashing the market or even opening doors on stations.
So yes, it seems very logical to me. I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 07:14:00 -
[30] - Quote
Scuzzy Logic wrote:Okay, then figure this one: How come if I take this here beauty *points at Tahyon Laser bank* and fire it at this here frigate *blows up Venture* this here freighter *blow up an Iteron 5* or this here random npc faclity *blows up mission decor* the goods spew out all nice and cozy in their own itty bitty container. Not to mention my friend here who tried using a Capital Missile warhead to do the same. Hell, Frigates that survive stealthbomber bombs still drop neat containers.
And then you're going to tell me this freaking thing can't spew out a freaking can that can survive space? B**** please.
(This is in-game terms to provide narrative structure)
When you attack another ship (player or npc) you are causing it to explode and leave behind a twisted and burned wreck. Some of that ships cargo, modules, rigs and objects survive that explosion and that's what you loot. You don't get 100% value of the destroyed ship back as loot, there is a lose as objects are destroyed or are flung off into space. Salvaging and salvage drones remove the twisted remains and collect anything of value as they go. The can that is left is the battered cargo hold or jet-can with the loot.
(Now I will admit that the wreckage should have momentum and that the new mechanic could be used to try and capture those smaller items thrown into space as additional loot, but that's up to CCP in the future.)
However, hacking implies that you are attempting to access a structure or system that you were not meant to access. Maybe that is why the mini-cans degrade so fast, you are exposing them to a scenario outside their original design, maybe these cans are used for internal storage within structures and stations, moved by human dock workers and specialised loading equipment. They aren't meant to withstand micro-tractor beams and in space transfers.
Now you could fire on the data/relic sites but you run the risk of destroying the very items you're seeking. But then you are no longer a hacker. There must be a reason we are hacking these structures rather than blowing them up, that applies to both the new and old hacking mechanics.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
|
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
125
|
Posted - 2013.06.01 10:25:00 -
[31] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:I like the idea of a transport exploration ship. Some of the useful loot can be quite bulky. Would be a nice incentive to not leave it behind. Don't see much room to iterate on that idea with the loot spew tho unless CCP makes an exception and puts bulky loot in the containers after the hacking. Otherwise it's gonna **** everyone else off.
What you (and others) are after is this.
A ship that is dedictated to exploration with matching bonuses, large cargo hold (cruiser or larger), has a good but not overpowered defense, little or no offence, can only be gotten from an LP store from a faction that has most of it's agents in low or null sec space and finally looks good...
But sadly doesn't exist... there's always a catch.
I choose to believe what I was PROGRAMMED to believe! |
|
|
|