|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1783
|
Posted - 2014.05.22 16:26:00 -
[1] - Quote
With the new changes this means if you are scouting, you can't really tell your FC where the hostile fleet warped because two gates are so close to each other. On TQ right now, unless the gates are completely overlapping it's usually trivial to scout this info. The below footage shows the actual problem on Sisi and then compares it to right now on TQ. The ship used on Sisi is a redeemer (not a particularly fast warping ship). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAuF46gpowg and this is for comparison on TQ right now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yaeVMKDb5E a long with a screeny where you can see the corp icon indicating clearly what moon the ship warped towards: http://puu.sh/8WACU/8f90d870ce.jpg This is a serious decrease in functionality and a heavy nerf on scouting.
Please CCP Blaze & Sledgehammer. You are our only hope :3 |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1796
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 14:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
Jinn Aideron wrote:Capqu wrote:Noriko Mai wrote:A cloaked ship is not part of your grid and therefore doesn't exist for you until it uncloaks. completely untrue, if you want proof ask anyone who has bombed and killed cloaked ships Why would your client need to know about a cloaked ship, when the server cluster does the AoE damage calculation? It doesn't. In fact, it makes a whole lot more sense not to impart clients with information on cloaked stuff (performance, hacking, etc). Hence Noriko Mai is likely correct, and Capqu in turn is not.
"Your grids" implies the collective grid that you and other players exist in. In that case Capqu is correct. The players co-exist on the same grid, they are informed about the same information in terms of ships entering/leaving and moving about - regardless of being cloaked or not.
One is simply "invisible" when cloaked, but still in the same grid. |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1796
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 17:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
Andreus Ixiris wrote:Clients do not receive information from the server about cloaked ships that are not their own. The server knows where they all are, but other clients simply are not sent any data on cloaked ships until they become uncloaked. CCP did it this way so that even if you had some way of watching the incoming data stream from their server, you wouldn't be able to know about cloaked ships.
Yes, therefore the wording Noriko used was bad. Because the grid is defined by the information the server retains - and that is your grid. So all ships, cloaked or not cloaked, are part of your grid.
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1796
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 18:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Octoven wrote: How about a little common sense? If you see an epithal and it is warping toward a planet there are two possibilities....the planet or POCO. Gee I wonder where they will go? As for overlapping planets and POCOs...make your best guess at least this way you can get off your ass and actually work for your kill rather than saying, "ooohhh lookie he is warping to POCO on planet 4 ok....warp, land, lock, easy kill."
Oh gees. This guy warped towards p5 and there is no other celestials in 180 degrees direction. I wonder which he went to?
^That is no big deal.
Oh gees. This guy warped towards p1,p2,p3, the sun and 3 belts and a gate. I wonder where he went?
^This is a big deal.
It was possible before, it is not on Sisi and arguing for "well now it's just more difficult deal with it" is boggling my mind. Why don't we just rollback probing to only being able to move one probe at a time then? Wasn't that just more difficult as well? Why should we iterate on it?
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1796
|
Posted - 2014.05.23 21:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Ammzi wrote:^This is a big deal. Too many tears. HTFU and deal with it. It is going to be a level playing field for everyone.
What ever you do - never get hired by CCP. Please. I would pay you real life money, just stay out of ccp. |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1796
|
Posted - 2014.05.24 08:19:00 -
[6] - Quote
Octoven wrote:Ammzi wrote:Octoven wrote: How about a little common sense? If you see an epithal and it is warping toward a planet there are two possibilities....the planet or POCO. Gee I wonder where they will go? As for overlapping planets and POCOs...make your best guess at least this way you can get off your ass and actually work for your kill rather than saying, "ooohhh lookie he is warping to POCO on planet 4 ok....warp, land, lock, easy kill."
Oh gees. This guy warped towards p5 and there is no other celestials in 180 degrees direction. I wonder which he went to? ^That is no big deal. Oh gees. This guy warped towards p1,p2,p3, the sun and 3 belts and a gate. I wonder where he went? ^This is a big deal. It was possible before, it is not on Sisi and arguing for "well now it's just more difficult deal with it" is boggling my mind. Why don't we just rollback probing to only being able to move one probe at a time then? Wasn't that just more difficult as well? Why should we iterate on it? You know...the effect doesn't take place until their ship is almost out of view anyway...at which point you can clearly see a streak of light that goes in the direction they are traveling. Im sorry, but if you can't determine in a 40K km streak which direction they are going then perhaps you should get the old probes out and give them a whirl.
Alright - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAuF46gpowg Which moon did he go to? On a scale of 1-100 % guaranteed. How easy it is to guess? |
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1797
|
Posted - 2014.05.24 11:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
Yep - and compare that to right now on TQ: http://puu.sh/8WACU/8f90d870ce.jpg You can easily see in that case he went to the right hand moon. The bracket overlaps there for 1-2 seconds and disappears.
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1797
|
Posted - 2014.05.24 14:46:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote: the one on the left, i'd say with 80-90% certainty, its not a nerf, deal with it and stop pissing on ccp sledgehammer's parade.
(7:16:51 PM) ammzi: Isa: (7:16:55 PM) ammzi: you went to the right hand moon (7:16:57 PM) ammzi: in (7:17:00 PM) ammzi: on sisi? (7:17:01 PM) ammzi: with the deemer? ... (7:27:12 PM) Isa: ammzi: yeah, the one on the right 13.
(13 being the moon at p5.) CCP Blaze said they will be looking into it, so I am happy. I am not here to **** on anyone's parade, I think the graphical effects look awesome, but there's no need for them to not have the same functionality as right now on TQ.
|
Ammzi
Love Squad Pasta Syndicate
1798
|
Posted - 2014.05.25 21:54:00 -
[9] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Ammzi wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote:Ammzi wrote:^This is a big deal. Too many tears. HTFU and deal with it. It is going to be a level playing field for everyone. What ever you do - never get hired by CCP. Please. I would pay you real life money, just stay out of ccp. Quit being such a drama queen. I'm fine with not being able to precisely pinpoint exactly where a ship has warped off too. This works both way for you too when you are warping off, and has no negative impact on overall gameplay. The general direction is more than enough. You seem to think you are entitled to know the precise location that another ship warps off too without putting in the effort and checking dscan.
You can't use dscan for a resolution lower than 5 degrees, which in that case those moons are. I have often use dscan to find out where people warped when I loaded grid after they already left it. This method cannot be used to pinpoint warp out location every single time. If it's a planet far away with many moons, you can only guess he went to the planet and not the bazillion other moons. If there's a sun and a bunch of planets it's very bright and it's also difficult to see where people go.
So this isn't a "precise location" of where people warp, nor the distance they choice to warp to. Just the actual direction. I don't see where the "entitlement" comment has to come in here. It is literally what is possible right now on TQ, I am not asking for additional information or changes, contrary I am asking for functionality to remain somewhat similar without neither diminishing nor increased information - which means BOTH parties in such a situation aren't gaining or losing anything.
Completely damn neutral. |
|
|
|