Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 53 post(s) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance
5282
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 16:56:00 -
[301] - Quote
CCP RedDawn wrote:Hello again.
Here are some more changes which will be on Singularity within the next few updates:
Anti-Virus Suppressors now have a Coherency of 60. (Previously 80) Anti-Virus Suppressors now have a Strength of 15. (Previously 20) Anti-Virus Suppressors now have a suppression rate of 15. (Previously 20) Anti-Virus Suppressors are no longer in the tier 3 difficulty. They only appear in tier 4 now. Restoration Nodes can now be found in the tier 3 difficulty. The Tech III Emergent Locus Analyzer electronic subsystems now have a +10 Virus Strength bonus.
Hack safe. CCP RedDawn Excellent. -áMy (mostly boring) Youtube channel. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
64
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:04:00 -
[302] - Quote
While I generally agree with T2 being stronger than T3 in this special case I think the +10 T3 bonus is okay for 2 reasons: 1. Covert Ops frigs are very cheap for T2 ships. If there were a T2 exploration cruiser or BC with a price tag of 100+m I would absolutely agree that it should be stronger than T3, but as it is using a T3 is massively more risky than a T2 frig because of the price difference, so making the T3 equally strong is okay in my book. 2. I don't really see a good way to make the T3 bonus more all-round than the T2 bonus with the current simple form of the minigame. This might very well change when it gets fleshed out a bit more in the future. |
|
CCP Bayesian
823
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:10:00 -
[303] - Quote
Changes should be on Sisi everyday. As well as the balancing that RedDawn and Soundwave have been doing we've squashed a whole bunch of defects and added in some more audio cues.
Prime is currently making some changes so the stuff is scattered in a more sensible manner so that it limits the bad cases where you are screwed over by collision issues.
We'll be making further changes to everything after release to improve the mechanics involved and the general usability. EVE Software Engineer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Euripides Salamanca
Aldebaran Eclipse INC
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 17:55:00 -
[304] - Quote
While not being much of a forum warrior and rather new to EVE (although I kept reading posts here and on various other EVE related sites long before even starting to play) I strongly feel that constructive feedback in this case, from as many players as possible, is crucial in convincing both CCP and our CSM representatives that - what they conceived and approved as improvement - is not going to work in current shape.
Many posters above already nailed it on the head. Rob Crowley, Naomi Hale, Kel Hound, Von Keigai and excellent summary post by Andreus Ixiris express what my thoughts are on the subject - so excuse me for creating yet another wall of text.
I'll try to keep it as concise as possible. I'd also like to point out that it feels universal for both solo and group play as well as stays outside of the ISK/hour or "balancing amount of loot" discussion.
- "Loot pinata" idea is contrary to design objectives for EVE presented by CCP during Fan Fest 2013
Those were: accessibility improvement for new players, getting rid of elements which are unnecessary, and apply thoughtful streamlining to create "involving and easier to get into, but still complex and hard to master" environment.
I'm relatively new player and it's hard to accuse me of being either bound to the "good old ways" or having 10 years trained "muscle memory" - and still "loot pinata" feels like exactly opposite of "accessible" . I know at least few people who are under 5mil SP or don't play longer than, say, 6 months, who had similar impressions after either trying this feature on SiSi or from watching this feature on stream.
- New players also don't feel comfortable with "loot pinata" - it feels awkward, confusing and inconsistent compared to everything else they start to learn about interaction with objects in EVE world.
Assuming that it's good and fun design which will be loved by new players and easy to get used to for those who agree to adapt only because new players don't complain (as opposed to "stagnant veterans" voiced concerns) is invalid. Because, lets face it, how many new players bother to check new features on SiSi, post outside of New Citizen Q&A forum or even watch FanFest or developers streams?
- The way how player interact with the game world and how objects interact with each other makes it impossible to rely solely on "twitch" skills even for very agile players.
When I'm being faced with challenge where scale of my (or team I belong to) success depends on my actual agility, I expect to get most precise tools to achieve that goal. Which basically means as close 1:1 translation of movement between my hand and its "extension" in the game world - my avatar. In shooter or simulator it's input latency reduction for example.
EVE plays like RTS rather than flight simulator, though. We can only decide where we want our ship to go but how fast and what route it will take to get there is decided by two main factors: ship stats and pathfinding. And we know both factors are far from being consistent: - big and heavy vessels with otherwise slow turn rate can do instant 180 degree spin when bumped by much smaller ships or when colliding with nearby objects; - collision boxes on collidable objects don't match up exactly with shape we see in game (which leads to either being bumped in random direction or ship taking different path than we would expect it to); - while our ship can clip through some massive objects it can also get randomly stuck on tiny debris and slow to a crawl; - instead of free 360 degree camera its jaw axis movement is restricted to some arbitrary invisible "horizon plane". While all those issues have small impact on "normal" EVE activities (either PvP or PvE) they often happen to be a deciding factor in high precision minigame, creating - instead of challenge to test reaction and ability to cooperate - frustrating struggle.
- Only EVE activity where unexpected technical issues lead to complete failure If connection to server is lost ship automatically warp out if ability to warp was possible. Very often if connection is established soon enough even disabled ship can survive to finish its task - is it mining, PvP or PvE combat ship can come back to the site and still collect reward, salvage or loot. Not after successful hacking attempt though. Site cleared, containers disappeared. Nothing.
- Feature discouraging multi-boxing but provoking other even more unwanted activities instead?
While I'm one of those anti-alt purists applauding every change leading to reduction and viability of multiboxing I don't buy that argument. Apart from surprising sudden twist from actively promoting multi accounts (Power of Two campaign etc) it seems bringing alt instead of friend will be common practice - because hacking minigame makes other person obsolete and alt can act as "scout" good enough. Real issue here, though is that "loot pinata" looks like activity which just waits for automation by some 3rd party "utility". If there are bots able to recognise which asteroid to mine and docking and undocking multiple ships then writing script simulating left clicks on screen position if pixel changes colour from yellow to green sounds like exercise from "C++ for Dummies "
I even had some ideas to post, to make it look less moan and groan. Imagine how one tiny feature can spoil the day if you care, and leave you with only 44 remaining characters...
|
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
18
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 18:25:00 -
[305] - Quote
oh another thread, x-poasting:
Quote:Hello CCP,
still there's no adjustable columns on the results window.
I have a hunch people with not so much excess screen real estate will want that badly. Just think of all the forum whining you could avoid with this simple change. Thank you in advance. |
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
2780
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 18:54:00 -
[306] - Quote
Euripides Salamanca, your post is awesome. You are a true EVEbro. Mane 614
|
Kahns
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 19:35:00 -
[307] - Quote
CCP Prime wrote:So for the scattering mechanism we've reduced the speed that the cans eject out at. It'll make chasing them almost unneeded.
Thanks for listening to us guys! I really think this will fix a vast number of the things I was complaining about. Group hug yo!
(I still think the loot pinata is a bad mixed metaphor and all that, but if we can at least avoid chasing cans into walls it won't feel so.... broken.) |
Kahns
Ixion Defence Systems Test Alliance Please Ignore
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 19:48:00 -
[308] - Quote
Sheena Tzash wrote:The troll:
Sit near a hacking site cloaked and wait for someone to hack the site for you. At the loot is released, uncloak and click away. Since you don't need to lock the container to loot it you don't need to worry about the lock delay. .
OK, maybe I was wrong and this new mechanic is so, so very much Eve like :D . Screw waiting for the loot to spew, kill the explorer... there's no NPC's to gum up the works. |
Yuki Kasumi
Some names are just stupid
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 20:07:00 -
[309] - Quote
I tried this feature out only 2 hours or so ago. So I assume I played the latest build available
Distribution of sites, I went through 45 systems (half empire and other half null/low) looking for exploration sites. I found 3 (1 empire and 2 in null), is this consistent with the rarity of these or was I just unlucky?
Expected return. Having done some mags and radars sites in the past I often got around 20-40m average per site unless I was a bit unlucky. Total look value for the three sites I was able to do (according to inventory) 52m isk, averaging 17.3m per site. That is hardly excellent income for 45 jumps and 1-2h of playing paying attention. Again is this consistent, with your wanted income for this profession?
I realize that 3 sites is hardly statistically significant to draw much if any conclusions from, but I would strongly urge you to consider the fact that hacking before was mostly a passive activity (sitting at the can and waiting). Now it requires constant attention (hacking minigame) at greater risk (due to easier scanning), not to mention that it has become a somewhat more involved activity. Personally at this rate even as a part time / just for fun explorer I find this level of income not to be worthwhile for anything else than occasional recreation. For reference two hours of mining would yield the same amount of isk approximately.
I do hope I was just unlucky... |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 20:09:00 -
[310] - Quote
Yuki Kasumi wrote:I tried this feature out only 2 hours or so ago. So I assume I played the latest build available
Distribution of sites, I went through 45 systems (half empire and other half null/low) looking for exploration sites. I found 3 (1 empire and 2 in null), is this consistent with the rarity of these or was I just unlucky?
Expected return. Having done some mags and radars sites in the past I often got around 20-40m average per site unless I was a bit unlucky. Total look value for the three sites I was able to do (according to inventory) 52m isk, averaging 17.3m per site. That is hardly excellent income for 45 jumps and 1-2h of playing paying attention. Again is this consistent, with your wanted income for this profession?
I realize that 3 sites is hardly statistically significant to draw much if any conclusions from, but I would strongly urge you to consider the fact that hacking before was mostly a passive activity (sitting at the can and waiting). Now it requires constant attention (hacking minigame) at greater risk (due to easier scanning), not to mention that it has become a somewhat more involved activity. Personally at this rate even as a part time / just for fun explorer I find this level of income not to be worthwhile for anything else than occasional recreation. For reference two hours of mining would yield the same amount of isk approximately.
I do hope I was just unlucky... Because there are fewer players on the test server the sites tend to clump up in systems less traveled. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
|
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 20:47:00 -
[311] - Quote
For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.
The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.
The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse. |
blink alt
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
54
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 20:48:00 -
[312] - Quote
I am loving the items being mapped to specific cans now. One small complaint would be the speed to the cans now. Dare I say it but now the cans seem I bit too slow. Since the items are now mapped it creates this situation where during say about the first 3-6 seconds of the jettison all the cans are stacked on eachother in a way where you can pick a specific can. I suppose it is not too big of a deal having the first pick or two outside your control but just a thought. |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1081
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 20:54:00 -
[313] - Quote
Kahns wrote:Sheena Tzash wrote:The troll:
Sit near a hacking site cloaked and wait for someone to hack the site for you. At the loot is released, uncloak and click away. Since you don't need to lock the container to loot it you don't need to worry about the lock delay. . OK, maybe I was wrong and this new mechanic is so, so very much Eve like :D . Screw waiting for the loot to spew, kill the explorer... there's no NPC's to gum up the works. I would feel it to be more entertaining to wait for the spew to occur then smart bomb right next to it. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Raven Solaris
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
213
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:01:00 -
[314] - Quote
Tim Ryder wrote:For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.
The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.
The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse.
Intentional, they want to experiment with forcing people to use the space scape instead of the overview.
My condolences. |
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:11:00 -
[315] - Quote
Raven Solaris wrote:Tim Ryder wrote:For me, being visually impaired, what's not on the overview doesn't exist.
The containers supposed to be analyzed doesn't appear on the overview using Load Default -> All, only Load Default -> General shows them.
The spawn containers doesn't appear on the overview even with that setting, so they're bugged even worse. Intentional, they want to experiment with forcing people to use the space scape instead of the overview. My condolences.
Pity that doesn't work - at all - for all of us. |
|
CCP Bayesian
823
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:14:00 -
[316] - Quote
Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things. EVE Software Engineer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:19:00 -
[317] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things.
The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone.
After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot. |
Liltha
Lost My Way Enterprises
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:31:00 -
[318] - Quote
If you are going to make the sites better with multiple people why not actually make them better with multiple people? Instead of that second person waiting around just to get cans let him add his hacking ability to the object as well, either by having the second person's virus strength get added to first or even better by having both hack the board at the same time with failure only happening if both fail. |
Liltha
Lost My Way Enterprises
7
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:42:00 -
[319] - Quote
On another note, it feels as if the high sec sites might be a tad too difficult for low skilled entry players to be able to hack the items in two runs. In part because the virus strength is only dependent on ship type and hacking module with the only way to get the better hacking module is to train hacking to 5 and the only way to get a better ship bonus by training to covert ops ships. With 20 virus strength it was taking at least 3 clicks per firewall to get past them and with only 2 tries luck is a bit against you if you don't also have the higher cohesion of trained skills.
I'd suggest adding skills that can raise virus strength or maybe weaken defenses on the site, or possibly other modules to do the same. Additionally there seems to be a useless implant that lowers cycle time on hacking and archeology modules that could be repurposed into a virus strength implant. |
|
CCP Prime
C C P C C P Alliance
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 21:58:00 -
[320] - Quote
Tim Ryder wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote:Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things. The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone. After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot.
Thanks for that constructive feedback. I really want to improve on the brackets so they are usable for all. This kind of feedback helps to make that case. Programmer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
|
kyofu
Praetorian Black Guard Frater Adhuc Excessum
37
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:18:00 -
[321] - Quote
Tim Ryder wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote:Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things. The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone. After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot.
This would also help the eye strain issue I complained of earlier. My eyesight is fine, but trying to distinguish those silly little cross hairs ends up giving me a headache. Larger sized icons, or a working overview would also help significantly with the carpal tunnel issue. Preferably a working overview. |
Veyer Erastus
Red-dormice
12
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:29:00 -
[322] - Quote
Practiced a bit in Obj A today and was rather pleasantly surprised. Loot pinata seemed much more doable than a couple days ago. Still the problem i raised in the beginning of the thread is still here. After doing 4 mainframes, my cargo was completely full. Parts, which are probably the most common container, take absurdly much space - 99% of everything that drops. I seriously believe it's necessary to shrink them from 1m^3 to 0.1m^3. |
Tim Ryder
Flippin DaBird Corporation 2
9
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 22:33:00 -
[323] - Quote
kyofu wrote:Tim Ryder wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote:Tim Ryder, we'd like to try to make it work for everyone so if you could suggest some changes that might improve your ability to see these things well enough to interact with them we'll definitely try to improve things. The single most important thing then - beyond anything else - is contrast. If you can, make them react to their background in some way so they're always clearly distinguished. That'd help everyone. After that, size is important. Trying to have them roughly the size of things on the overview would help a lot. This would also help the eye strain issue I complained of earlier. My eyesight is fine, but trying to distinguish those silly little cross hairs ends up giving me a headache. Larger sized icons, or a working overview would also help significantly with the carpal tunnel issue. Preferably a working overview.
Yes, getting this on the overview should be a no brainer, experimentation is fine, but maybe a working system is better?
In addition, I'm taking damage - despite no rats present - while analyzing, making a covops ship worse than useless - is that intended? |
Nihill Widderslaint
EVE University Ivy League
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:06:00 -
[324] - Quote
Not sure if this should be mentioned here, but it does relate to hacking so..
The Implant - Poteque 'Prospector' Environmental Analysis EY-1005 - is still set to -5% cycle time, for salvaging (which is ok) and hacking and archeology modules (for both of which cycle time is now pointless.)
The Implant - Poteque 'Prospector' Hacking HC-905 - Is adjusted for the update, with a +5 Coherence. On this one I just want to give my opinion, +5 coherence is quite pointless considering most strengths from the minigame are rounded to the x0 (20,30,40,etc) - So my feedback would be either set it to +10 coherence or +5 strength (which would be relevant considering sometimes you halve the firewall/etc coherence to half, sometimes a 05 does count in strength)
Probably many ppl pointed this out ahead of me but just to make sure it is said.
Cheers! |
Karsa Egivand
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
197
|
Posted - 2013.05.30 23:24:00 -
[325] - Quote
Veyer Erastus wrote:Practiced a bit in Obj A today and was rather pleasantly surprised. Loot pinata seemed much more doable than a couple days ago. Still the problem i raised in the beginning of the thread is still here. After doing 4 mainframes, my cargo was completely full. Parts, which are probably the most common container, take absurdly much space - 99% of everything that drops. I seriously believe it's necessary to shrink them from 1m^3 to 0.1m^3.
Also, people being able to loot for hours and accumulate a lot of explorer loot in their cargoholds will make for some nice killmails! |
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
1515
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 02:26:00 -
[326] - Quote
One thing that still bothers me about the minigame, is the randomness of it. The game is interesting, but not really hard per say. It's hard to win in the same way winning the lottery is hard. With Hacking V and T2 Codebreaker I still need to hope not to hit a suppressor and hope I find utilities or else in 0.0/Low sites or it's pretty much a failed hack.
Making the core defined may help to remove the click and pray aspect and give it some strategy. CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it.
Idea for Improving NPE. |
haloden
Gods Of Agony
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 05:41:00 -
[327] - Quote
Brooks Puuntai wrote:One thing that still bothers me about the minigame, is the randomness of it. The game is interesting, but not really hard per say. It's hard to win in the same way winning the lottery is hard. With Hacking V and T2 Codebreaker I still need to hope not to hit a suppressor and hope I find utilities or else in 0.0/Low sites or it's pretty much a failed hack.
Making the core defined may help to remove the click and pray aspect and give it some strategy. could allso make it like minesweeper :) |
Flamespar
Woof Club
605
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 05:46:00 -
[328] - Quote
haloden wrote:Brooks Puuntai wrote:One thing that still bothers me about the minigame, is the randomness of it. The game is interesting, but not really hard per say. It's hard to win in the same way winning the lottery is hard. With Hacking V and T2 Codebreaker I still need to hope not to hit a suppressor and hope I find utilities or else in 0.0/Low sites or it's pretty much a failed hack.
Making the core defined may help to remove the click and pray aspect and give it some strategy. could allso make it like minesweeper :)
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 can post on a forum, therefore I represent everyone. |
Flamespar
Woof Club
605
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 05:52:00 -
[329] - Quote
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. I can post on a forum, therefore I represent everyone. |
Naomi Hale
Children of New Eden
119
|
Posted - 2013.05.31 06:56:00 -
[330] - 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! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 23 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |