open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The Great Deep Safe Nerf of 2010
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : last (28)

Author Topic

Posted - 2010.04.13 06:02:00 - [241]

Edited by: Matalino on 13/04/2010 06:05:10
In general I believe that this is a good change. However, I disagree with the plan to destroy piloted ships. Items and unpiloted ships should be destroyed, piloted ships should remain.

A pilot would be unable to do anything at a deep safe spot. Once he leaves the deep safe spot he will be unable to return to it.

I do not see enough value gained from destroying piloted ships to offset the damage done to those who might be away from the game during the next month.

If it is unacceptable to leave pilots at a deep safe spot, I believe that it would be preferable to relocate the ship to the grid of the local star rather than destroy the ship.

Monkey M3n
GK inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:08:00 - [242]

Edited by: Monkey M3n on 13/04/2010 06:07:56
op is a gay

Vir Hellnamin
Electus Matari
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:08:00 - [243]

Stupid question, since it's not exactly clear:

Are you going to delete to 10+ AU BM's too or not, or will they just stay in the system as "non-warpable" (so you really need to check if they're crap or not by trial-and-fail)?

Pasha Cracken
The Maverick Navy
IT Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:13:00 - [244]

CCP reminds me of SOE now.

Posted - 2010.04.13 06:18:00 - [245]

So far, not a single reply from the "game makers".
Does this mean we are
a) ignored
b) correct, and are u adjusting your plans?

I see a lot of valuable replies here. The 10 AU border is too small. Its plain, stupit ans simple. Increase it to a more realistic number and noone has problems. Something like 25 AU circlewise out from the furthest object from the middle of that universe is morethan enugh for most of us, and playable. Shoeldnt make so much of a problem should it?

Otherworld Enterprises
Otherworld Empire
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:19:00 - [246]

Edited by: Chribba on 13/04/2010 06:25:51
/starts to issuing those 1000au warps to avoid getting the mining fleet wiped/ Laughing

and also that destroys my uber evil plan of placing a TCU 5000au off Sad

and 10au is too little. one should be able to at least be out of scanner range, in order to be tracked down a prober would have to work a bit, not just flying around hitting the scanner button.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:24:00 - [247]

Why the bloody hell DESTROY ships out in deep safes ?
What about people that are in ships there now, and their accounts are inactive, and they only come back AFTER the patch ?
Just dump'em in a random spot inside the system far from anything else instead of deleting them.

No, I don't know anybody in this potential situation personally, but it's completely screwed up to just announce such a mass deletion barely a month before it'll happen.
And a lot of people don't even read devblogs.

Dammit !

Pasha Cracken
The Maverick Navy
IT Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:28:00 - [248]

the 2 biggest names in MD have spoken,

Listen ccp, just listen,

Wait, the intern is reading this isnt he.

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:29:00 - [249]

I hope you are fixing the grid load issue alongside of this, right?

Zenko Incorporated
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:44:00 - [250]

Just to increase the future hilarity: Would it be terribly impossible to move the deep space stuff to, say, a random spot within 10 AU of the star and declare the treasure hunt started?

Posted - 2010.04.13 06:47:00 - [251]

Bad idea - Please do not add "walls" to systems.

Miner Tech
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:50:00 - [252]

Edited by: Gnulpie on 13/04/2010 06:53:10
1) 10 AU are not enough. Mission bookmarks, directional scanner, avoiding getting slaughtered at jump-ins in lag-heavy systems just because of lag. All that needs more than 10 AU.

2) Deleting ships, especially supercapitals for players who aren't logged in is ... uhm ... totally idiotic? ****ing off people in such a way who are away from the game for a while (because of RL for example) gains you NO benefits at all but gives you really bad reputation.

3) Bad approach in general. You are - again - destroying potential and limit your game. You say the deep safe spots are a problem because noobs can't create them any more and they are difficult to scan down? Then give us the tools to scan them down! Give us ways to create those bookmarks. Expand your game and your game functionality! But you make the exact opposite, you limit your game functionality and destroy possibilites and specialization. That is a bad approach.

4) Oh, before I forget it ... sandbox approach? Crying or Very sad

Shade Millith
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:53:00 - [253]

Originally by: Gnulpie
3) Bad approach in general. You are - again - destroying potential and limit your game. You say the deep safe spots are a problem because noobs can't create them any more and they are difficult to scan down? Then give us the tools to scan them down! Give us ways to create those bookmarks. Expand your game and your game functionality! But you make the exact opposite, you limit your game functionality and destroy possibilites and specialization. That is a bad approach.

They ARE easy to probe down

Probing them out. Use Deepsafes to change from 300 AU's to 1000's covered. If it's there in space and uncloaked, it's probeable.

Joe Space
Pod Liberation Authority
Posted - 2010.04.13 06:55:00 - [254]

Bad idea.

[Edit: everything I had to say has been said above over and over again.]

Don't do it.

Posted - 2010.04.13 06:57:00 - [255]

ccp please revise this idea thanks.Neutral

Posted - 2010.04.13 07:00:00 - [256]

This idea is so lame, please reconsider it... This bookmark problem is not the most important...

WHAT ABOUT THE LAG???? When are you going to fix that???

The Ankou
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:02:00 - [257]

CCP: if the problem is with people making cynos 500 au (in order so that they dont get killed loading the system), and you dont want people to be 500 au, why not just make cynos invisible to local, eliminating the need to make deep safes?

Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:07:00 - [258]

Solar system radius + 10AU, seems reasonable.

Please send out at least 2 mails to all character owners. One 2 weeks prior to patch day and another 1 day prior informing them of the upcoming expansion and this new feature.

The mail should state first off the date of the expansion and that all players who have items/ships/structures outside the system's radius+10AU will be deleted and players will be podded.

Please give all players fair warning as this would be an unprecedented act by the game designers. Also, just think how much you will get from re-subs for people checking to ensure they are in range. $$

Daan Sai
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:13:00 - [259]

Please check with the mission spawning folks! Many lvl 4 and lvl5 missions spawn a lot more than 10AU out. If we can't warp to them it will man a lot of stuck petitions. Also we bookmark wrecks to return and salvage, so 10AU is way too small.

Also consider vary large systems with more than 10 Au between planets.

Please consider a 20-30 AU limit if you must, but 10 AU will break a lot of secondary things apart from unfair super deep safe spots.


Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:17:00 - [260]

good god, why don't the dev's just start coding up some more incredibly useful and well reasoned content, like a fix for missiles that makes them more realistic agility wise and utterly unable to hit smaller ships cause they'd get a fixed turning radius. Or how about we add some more features to the fleet system, like a fixed non moveable graphical display of where all your fleet members are in the system, that'd help in fleet fights Rolling Eyes.
Roll back the fleet code to pre dominion, let everyone deal with the intense and almost infathomable torture of having to invite people to fleets and not be able to catch ninja looters (ooooooooo the horrors), and if you really can't get the programming hard on that seems to have swept through the dev cages out of your systems, at least just make the limit mesh with current scanning ranges (256 au), since there's been proof provided that it'll work just fine as it is, and I'm sure more people can confirm it. I'd make some plea about getting the friggin grids to load, but I'll do something better. How about we explore the possibility of giving alliances the option to have the server bits responsible for the nodes of the territory they claim, but are not currently using (make reference to large sections of unused 0.0 space or space used by very few leech like alliance members while others are fighting), and applying that processing power to the system/surrounding systems where a huge friggin blob of people are trying to have a decent fight? Does that sound like it'd be possible?
p.s. anyone who posts about people unfairly exploiting this idea to make counter attacks impossible can suck my douche canoe-ing nuts, its a quick idea that might be good to expand on, not a full fledged plan.

Mercenaries of Andosia
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:20:00 - [261]

/me have a look in the crystal ball:

Good day EVE subscriber base.

We have found a brilliant solution to all lag issues after the successful implementation described in CCP Lemur's previous dev blog, that will enable all of you, our valued customers, to have the ability to play the game without any lag. (Isn't THAT exciting stuff!!)

1) All systems of security < 0.5 will be removed. (They are lawless anyway)
2) All assets within these systems will be removed.
3) All characters within these systems will be returned to the stations where they were born at within the 0.5 security grid of systems.
4) All the hardware that will become available from this will be used to reinforce major mission running and mining hubs.

We trust you will find this in order. (If not, we don't really care, go play Hello Kitty or WoW)

EVE Online developer team, with UBER ideas.
Happy gaming.

Angus McSpork
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:26:00 - [262]

Originally by: Zhentar
More importantly, why are you doing this now, before you fix the fracking loading issues that make deep safe spots necessary for any shred of a fair fight in today's EVE?

Bingo, qft..

Navy of Xoc
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:27:00 - [263]

Think this is pretty fail tbh... These safes are at the moment the only way to titan bridge a large fleet into system thats already pretty full, without risking slaughter on gridload.

Whats the problem with them in the first place. 10 au is very limited make it a distance where Deep space probes actually get use.

Also why not instead of deleting items and players that are outside the new range, just scatter them accross the system. That way its like a treasure hunt the next few days, knowing all those people that store items in deep safe. There might be systems full of Bs's that are just abandoned.

Also getting rid of deep safes completely removes any safe spot to swap ships out (eject the alt/pop in the main), As current mechanics stand you cant lock a ship if you eject and the minute you eject anyone else can get in immediately. So if your using a storage alt for your super cap you cant dare eject in a pos incase someone warps to the pos and hops into your ship. A deep safe allows you to go to somewhere relatively unscannable and swap in and out of your ships without risking someone stealing them.

Finally, My solution would be make longer range probes, making it the further (to a limit) the safe is, the harder it will be to find at first. So make a 200au probe or a 500 au probe with a low strength but it will show you where something is within 64 au. Meaning that No deepsafe is "safe" if someone is looking for it. but yet they do provide a level of security compared to a safe spot or a pos.

Monster Dude
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:35:00 - [264]

Edited by: Monster Dude on 13/04/2010 07:35:39
Why I have feeling that somebody focusing development on wrong things?

If there would be no lag (not to mention NOT LOADED GRID) after portaling to a cyno or jumping through the gates then YES. Then why not...
But for now we are getting portaled and ending up in cloning service without even seing grid! And of course CCP does not reimburse it... But for a perspective of the one who discovered himself in cloning service it looks like "Hey, what I did wrong? Did I have a tiny chance to protect myself? Hunging in no grid and then going straight to cloning is not what I paid for, right?"
So basically players did find a workaround. They do some work (yeah to make deep isn't clap you hands - it is work and time) to help the problem. And now what I read is - "We don't want you to take care of yourselfs. We want you be dying after jumps in no grid, have no chance to survive" Correct me if I'm wrong?

Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:35:00 - [265]

This is pretty ****ing terrible CCP.. Your removing the only counter we have to your latest failexpansion for no obvious reason..

Evil or Very Mad

Miep Miep
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:37:00 - [266]

Hey, ccp, what about logging in, and actualy play your game a bit. i believe you totaly lost your connection to your customers and your game.

STOP being retarted and START fixing important stuff.

hints: Lag , t2 bpos, lag, wrong session timers, lag, aggro timers, lag, fix some of the zillion exploits out there ( yes making deep safes may be one of them, properbly the most unimportant), lag , horribel ui, lag, unloved shiptypes ( black ops, some of the t3 cruisers, eafrigs etc), lag, etc lag, etc......

Posted - 2010.04.13 07:40:00 - [267]

I cant bookmark my deep space missions anymore and salvage them later :(

Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:41:00 - [268]

Ignoring the obvious lag/fleet issue. Ignoring the fact that deep space probes are now almost totally useless (there might be a few systems they'll work in). Ignoring sandbox ideals.....

You are giving people just over a month to move stuff that may have been in place for YEARS.

I'm interested to know how you believe this is going to retain customers? If I came back from a break to find stuff destroyed I'd probably just close the client and delete it.

You really have completely lost the plot with this one.

I think there will be an awful lot of people taking an extended summer break if this goes through and you don't fix the lag.

Still I'm sure there's someone in CCP who believes they know what they're doing. Heh who am I kidding?

Darth Vapour
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:45:00 - [269]

This creates a division between older "haves" and newer "have-nots".

There are people who "have" 100 million skillpoints which I "have not". So it is not more then fair to give everyone SP equal to the oldest player to eliminate this division.

As for this change Im sure the people who coded this would be no use helping to fix the performance issues so Ill not say that their time could be much better spent. Destroying player assets with 35 days notification however is seriously stupid. As your company allows players to pay up to a year in advance for having an account this would be the minimum grace period to not having your assets destroyed arbitrarily for a change you decide is needed. Simply disallowing the creation of bookmarks, warping to fleet members in remote space and deletion of said bookmarks will do the job just as well.

Seth Ruin
Ominous Corp
Posted - 2010.04.13 07:52:00 - [270]

Awesome. Glad to know CCP is continuing to ignore issues people have been *****ing about for years and instead nerfing completely ****ing random parts of their game.

Pages: first : previous : ... 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 ... : last (28)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only