open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The not-so-great-after-all deep safe nerf of 2010
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

Author Topic

ElvenLord
4S Corporation
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.16 23:54:00 - [61]
 

Much better solution :D

thanks Noah, and thanks Grayscale

Crystal Starbreeze
Posted - 2010.04.16 23:58:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Originally by: Crystal Starbreeze
I want a REASON for the 256AU deep safe probes (I used to have a reason because of stuff that is out there, now it won't be :( ).


Have you ever tried to find anyone in X-7O? Beyond that though, yes, we recognize that said probes have somewhat reduced utility after this change (although the range of situations that they were previously useful in was fairly limited already - one reason for making this change is that issues of spherical volumes quickly made finding things in deep safes exceptionally difficult/time-consuming from the off). We may find additional uses for the skill in future but we don't have development bandwidth right now to make any additional changes at this time.



I have found items (abandoned fighters) which were successfully retrieved at 700 au away from the sun.

The method used was get 150au from the solar system; launch one deep space 256AU probe; shift drag it, launch second, shift drag it. If you start dropping probes at about 150AU the client auto-scales so the solar system is fairly small in the end you get a nice brick of 256AU's approximately 500AU x 250AU x 250AU, then shift drag them around in a quadrant heading out. Best bets for searching are finding a straight line of two long distance objects then going out from there. Keep on expanding and presto you find your target.

I highly doubt most people have ever tried Or have the skills to do it; but it is possible. Yes it took me about an hour to finally narrow in, but it CAN be done.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2010.04.17 00:23:00 - [63]
 

Originally by: Guillame Herschel
Originally by: Sub Trader
what is the need for removing long distance bookmnarks anyway? bored programmers?

0.0 peeps were anchoring sovereignty structures at deep safes, making the system sovereignty very difficult to challenge.

The nerf has nothing to do with grid lag or large fleets. The new sov features suddenly made deep safes a game-breaking issue. That's why it is so urgent to nerf DSS as soon as possible.

Why they don't just confine sov structures to the 20AU limit is a question I'd like to know the answer to. My guess is it just isn't possible with the current server code to tag an item with a maximum-distance-anchorable-from-the-sun parameter and have it actually work.

See Greyscale.. AGAIN a player has to tell us WHAT the possible reason for this is. That is embarrassing.

Cause, 2,300 objects with 1,700 of them ships can't be THAT problem. I bet there are more objects within EACH solar systems new 20AU boundary than that which can't even be probed down.
Conclusion: this has nothing to do with freeing up resources.

So any possibilities we could hear a "We do this because OF <xyz>" from you guys?

Jurai Talar
Posted - 2010.04.17 00:36:00 - [64]
 

Edited by: Jurai Talar on 17/04/2010 00:36:37
Edited by: Jurai Talar on 17/04/2010 00:36:29
Originally by: Tres Farmer

See Greyscale.. AGAIN a player has to tell us WHAT the possible reason for this is. That is embarrassing.

So any possibilities we could hear a "We do this because OF <xyz>" from you guys?


I am guessing that CCP was trying to avoid pointing out a possible exploit until it have been fixed. In this case however, they needed to tell the playerbase what they were doing so that we could move our stuff away from DSS. The result: they told us WHAT they were doing but not WHY.

Veliria
Posted - 2010.04.17 00:37:00 - [65]
 

5.9 BILLION AU?
Wtf...what is the point of having that.
If you tried warping to it....dear lord...

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2010.04.17 00:38:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: Tres Farmer
Originally by: Guillame Herschel
Originally by: Sub Trader
what is the need for removing long distance bookmnarks anyway? bored programmers?

0.0 peeps were anchoring sovereignty structures at deep safes, making the system sovereignty very difficult to challenge.

The nerf has nothing to do with grid lag or large fleets. The new sov features suddenly made deep safes a game-breaking issue. That's why it is so urgent to nerf DSS as soon as possible.

Why they don't just confine sov structures to the 20AU limit is a question I'd like to know the answer to. My guess is it just isn't possible with the current server code to tag an item with a maximum-distance-anchorable-from-the-sun parameter and have it actually work.

See Greyscale.. AGAIN a player has to tell us WHAT the possible reason for this is. That is embarrassing.

Cause, 2,300 objects with 1,700 of them ships can't be THAT problem. I bet there are more objects within EACH solar systems new 20AU boundary than that which can't even be probed down.
Conclusion: this has nothing to do with freeing up resources.

So any possibilities we could hear a "We do this because OF <xyz>" from you guys?


Sorry, yes - I didn't outline the reasons in this blog because Lemur and I covered them briefly the previous one:

Quote:
We've been debating what to do about these bookmarks since before Apocrypha was even released: with the new scanning system, ships in these locations are essentially invulnerable in the majority of situations, and they can be utilized by any ship without any inherent cost.

On top of this, in Tyrannis we're (hopefully!) removing the last of the various bugs that allow deep safes to be created. This will place us firmly into a situation where the only way to access locations outside the system proper will be via "legacy" bookmarks. This creates a division between older "haves" and newer "have-nots": as a new player coming into the game, the only way you'd be able to reach points outside the system proper would be to acquire a bookmark from an older player.

This is not something we're comfortable with, and we've now reached the point where we have both a solution we're happy with and the resources available to implement it.


In brief: the defect was fixed, a tidy-up was suggested, and we agreed that it was a good idea, mostly in order to level the playingfield going forward.

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.17 00:52:00 - [67]
 

Edited by: Batolemaeus on 17/04/2010 01:02:02
Edited by: Batolemaeus on 17/04/2010 00:57:07
You don't get it, do you?

Have you, ccp, fixed gridloading issues? If yes, okay, go ahead.


If not, what the heck is wrong with you?


Also, it seems that you didn't notice a gaping hole in your implementation. It will not be possible to create "deep" space safespots above/under the sun. Most systems are planes, but your bookmarkable zone is spherical.

This means that any 200something AU bookmarks, which are possible in a lot of systems due to their diameter, are still possible to warp to, but not possible to create, ever.

So in effect you're killing a lag mitigation technique which relies on 500+AU bookmarks, while further widening the gap between older and new players by making certain bookmarks impossible to acquire (sans copying) post patch. Which, kinda, conflicts with your stated goal..


//edith:
Also, i see no fix for people making a few gazillion bookmarks in a line just around the border now, waiting until post patch, warping to the furthest still existing bookmark, and just burning beyong the boundary. What's going to happen to people who cross that boundary?

Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
Posted - 2010.04.17 00:54:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
We may find additional uses for the skill in future but we don't have development bandwidth right now to make any additional changes at this time.
ugh The CCP version of "future" tends to be a bit more long-range than most players prefer. Not to mention the caveat of "may find". For the moment I'll just chalk those skill points up as completely wasted.


YT Forever
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:06:00 - [69]
 

So I did a quick check and I think the fastest ship with all the goodies and a pilot with the best implants and in local a suitable gang boost - the best you can get is about 18km per sec
If 1 au = 150,000,000km then to get 20 au past the furthest celestial body would take you 5.5 years ! Got to ask again - what the hell is the point in setting a 20au limit when there is no way in getting there! And as pointed out above by Batolemaeus
"Also, it seems that you didn't notice a gaping hole in your implementation. It will not be possible to create "deep" space safe spots above/under the sun. Most systems are planes, but your bookmarkable zone is spherical. This means that any 200something AU bookmarks, which are possible in a lot of systems due to their diameter, are still possible to warp to, but not possible to create, ever"
So please do not BS us with comments about how much space we have to play in and that it is a volume issue when we can’t get to 99% of that volume!!!
“ As mentioned in the previous reply, the issue is less range and more volume. A 150AU radius system has an "internal volume" of ~14m cubic AU (if my math is right). The 170AU sphere you get with the 20AU extension has a volume of ~20m cubic AU. If we punched that out to 50AU, it'd be ~33m. 20AU was a number we settled on as being "about right" in terms of not making it too constricted in small systems while also not making it excessively large in big systems.”

ShadowDraqon
The Quantum Company
Independent Faction
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:08:00 - [70]
 

95 thousand lightyears?

...but I thought you couldn't go to Jove space...

Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:31:00 - [71]
 

Don't make this change, please. It seems like every time some kind of minor problem occur and it is decided that it must be fixed, you Devs seems to respond with finding ways to nerf or remove things instead of improve or add things. It will only make the game less then what it is. Apparently there are two reasons for this coming change:

- Hard to scan down pilots in deep safes.
Why not take a look on how you can make it easier to scan down people that are far away? It is understandable that some kind of limit can be needed, but that would rather be 500-1000 AU then the current suggestion.

- New players vs Old players
Why not make it easier to make deep safe spots? Seriously, why not make it so players can warp anywhere they want, like the way you move probes in the solar system map. It should be doable and a limit on how far you can "freewarp" can be set (100 AU perhaps). The limit could be based on the ship's sensor strength.

The best argument to why deep safes should stay in game is because of lag. You seriously need to consider this. Even if the lag is fixed we all know from experience that it only takes one expansion to get the lag monster back with a vengeance.

We 0.0 players have accepted deep safes as a solution to the problem. It isn't the solution we hoped for, we much rather would have the possibility to hotdrop enemy fleets, but right now deep safes is the only option. You guys at CCP should celebrate that we can use deep safes, it makes players PvP even when game breaking lag would make it impossible.

If it is possible to make a change somewhat like my suggestions above, it should solve a lot. If fleets have the ability to cyno in hundreds of AU away, they may get the time they need to load the grid and fight. If probes can be changed so it is easier to get some kind of basic deep space scanner hit then you don't need to worry about the troubles of scanning people down. If everyone can freewarp XX AU then both new and old players can make deep safes. An added bonus is that there will be less need to have dozens of safespots to bounce between in systems likely to be hotspots.

If the lag gets better then less people will cyno in at a deep safe. If the lag gets worse again after an expansion, players can use deep safes when entering a system. What is the option? Should we stop fighting because we can't enter the system without sacrificing pretty much the whole fleet?

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:47:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Batolemaeus on 17/04/2010 01:47:47
Actually, let me make a counter proposal.


I don't have a problem with moving everything back into the system. So this can stay.

However:
1) Implement an official (and documented!) method to create semi deep safespots. I don't care if some skills play a role in it, but it should be available to anyone.

This means that we won't have to worry about any future exploits allowing the creation of said bookmarks, and also avoid any problems with legacy bookmarks that can't be created post patch.

2) Enlarge the bookmarkeable area to +50AU(or even 100AU) from the farthest celestial from the sun.

This means that it is possible to get at least far enough that portaling in is possible without dying immediately, plus it is far enough that sling bubble placement is a realistic choice. Warp time will be long enough to make it possible to gangwarp most ships to a better safespot. It is also easily covered by deep space probes and realistically covered by normal probes.


3) Make it impossible to bookmark things outside of the sphere. You're still left with the problem that whenever a new bug appears that makes it possible to go further out, you either have to prevent warping beyond the border (which makes for other hilarious exploits, like bookmarks just on the edge and flying past it), or risk having the same issue again, just with npc corp alts logged off 1,2 or even 10k au from the sun as warp anchors. Scrapping the entire "fix" you proposed, and simply boosting deep space probes to cover _everything_ would solve all issues too..

Merouk Baas
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:47:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: Merouk Baas on 17/04/2010 01:54:01
Originally by: YT Forever
Got to ask again - what the hell is the point in setting a 20au limit when there is no way in getting there!


They're giving a 20 AU margin of error because agent missions create bookmarks somewhat at random, and these bookmarks COULD be beyond the outermost planet by 1 au or 2 or 10. So, rather than having to check that no mission will give a bookmark outside the range, they decided to just add 20 AU margin of error.

Batolemaeus: using the word "deep" is just making them cover their ears and say "lalala can't hear you". I don't think they want to allow anything past the 20 AU range, period. However, they MAY be willing to let us create bookmarks up and down from the sun, within the 20 AU sphere limit. By moving a probe-like pointer around, for example. So much space within each solar system not being used...

Currently, if you're a smart player looking to profit from this change, making yourself a nice set of bookmarks up and down from the sun, but within the 20 AU range, is the way to go. Because, nobody will be able to make such bookmarks soon. And, since they're within range, they won't get "moved". There will be pretty high demand for these bookmarks.

Caladain Barton
Navy of Xoc
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:49:00 - [74]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

In brief: the defect was fixed, a tidy-up was suggested, and we agreed that it was a good idea, mostly in order to level the playingfield going forward.


Respond please to using Deep Safe's as a work around to game crippling lag, and that taking them away *$&^s over Fleet fights.

You've already admitted you didn't fully think through this change. Have you guys sat down and talked about nuking the only way to get a fleet in system to have a fight?

What "CCP approved" method will you be giving us to get around the lag if you take away DSS?

Lecom
Hope and Change
INQUISITION.
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:52:00 - [75]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

On top of this, in Tyrannis we're (hopefully!) removing the last of the various bugs that allow deep safes to be created. This will place us firmly into a situation where the only way to access locations outside the system proper will be via "legacy" bookmarks. This creates a division between older "haves" and newer "have-nots": as a new player coming into the game, the only way you'd be able to reach points outside the system proper would be to acquire a bookmark from an older player.

In brief: the defect was fixed, a tidy-up was suggested, and we agreed that it was a good idea, mostly in order to level the playingfield going forward.


Thats a little more that a tidy up. IMO your reasons are a little ludicrous. There are many have and have-nots in this game. There are many things original players have that newer players do not have. There are many things that are very difficult (but not impossible) for a newer player to obtain.

Such an aweful waste of space...

Caladain Barton
Navy of Xoc
The Remnant Legion
Posted - 2010.04.17 01:55:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: Batolemaeus
This means that it is possible to get at least far enough that portaling in is possible without dying immediately, plus it is far enough that sling bubble placement is a realistic choice. Warp time will be long enough to make it possible to gangwarp most ships to a better safespot.



You're unfortunately wrong on the minimum cyno distance to prevent fleet death. 250au minimum, 300-500au is the safe money, 1000au when bringing in lots o'people with caps and such. Otherwise warp time is faster than the load time, and the fleet is slaughtered.

Miss President
Caldari
SOLARIS ASTERIUS
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:00:00 - [77]
 

ok so old 10AU is now 20AU

no where in the blog it is talked about deep space probes 256AU and reimbursing skills points.

Care to comments?

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:02:00 - [78]
 

With a radius+100AU you'd be able to create 200AU spots away from the enemy fleet most of the time, which is reasonable enough if you combine it with sling bubbles.

I obviously pulled some numbers out of my rear. The actual radius of the sphere should be big enough to make it possible to 200AU+ from your enemy.

Mack Bane
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:02:00 - [79]
 

ehm, just so i get this straight.Somebody made a bookmark, you need to "overshoot"warp to the furthest planet from this system for what? 18.69 YEARS to reach it?
How is that even possible? the game is not THAT old.Question
Or was it at one point in history possible, with ultra-fast ships?
or did the Universe expand? Very Happy

Kuseka Adama
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:04:00 - [80]
 

First off. WOOT thanks for addressing several of the concerns of players

I hope it means you're looking to address more of them but couldn't mention those changes in this dev blog.

However since the devs seem to be looking i'd like to propose an alternate solution to the lag problem so many are worried about.

*puts on flame suit*

A lot of lag in this game is caused by a simple truth: One node can not process the power of several hundred high speed connections at the same time. The capability doesn't exist. It doesn't exist in Anarchy online it hasn't existed in other games it doesn't exist in WoW which is why they have omgwtf 329847290374 servers.

There's very little lag in jita but lets face it you cant reinforce every node in the game like Jita is. Anyway the reason for the collision of hundreds of high speed connections is one of two reasons. Trade (which you cant do anything about as the game is dependent on it) or Player owned Structures: These objects take obscene amounts of damage and time to destroy under the best of circumstances. In my opinion TOO DAMNED MUCH! The amount of damage required to destroy a POS requires a fleet of hundreds of ships. A ton of capitals a lot of stacked range battleships and scouts. The problem players in this thread refer to usually occur because Jumping onto a grid puts them too close to a tower battle. The deep safes allowed them to jump on a grid in the theater of battle but not be completely decimated by lag. Allowing an effective counter strike force if they were behind. The other scenario is the reverse where the defense is ready and waiting in a system and the offense has to use a deep safe to have a chance of dealing with the enemy.

My solution to lag: Weaken POS. Not just by a little...a TON make it so a large structure doesnt require more than ten capital ships to take down in a reasonable timeframe. (10-20 minutes or 1-2 siege cycles) Why do this? Because the size of the defense fleet is usually proportional to the attacking fleet. If we base this on proportion then a defense fleet will not send everything it has to deal with a threat. Leaving a field of maybe 60 ships going at it with out all that much lag. This in turn would bring about more open field tactics. Turning what was a game of castles shooting at each other into a mobile run and gun scenario. This would allow those with the proper minds to execute tactical maneuver based warfare among systems due to the fact players would be freed up to do other things. Simply put the less required to take the POS the more that can be put into other POS's in other systems.

End the reason lag exists and lag will lessen. for what a lot of people are clamoring for would probably take a Cray Supercomputer. And you cant put one of those on every attackable POS system in Eve.

Merouk Baas
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:04:00 - [81]
 

It used to be possible to rightclick on the map and "make bookmark there."

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:23:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
In brief: the defect was fixed, a tidy-up was suggested, and we agreed that it was a good idea, mostly in order to level the playingfield going forward.

Ok, thanks for the reply - highly appreciated.


Ra Vhim
Black Bag Ops
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:34:00 - [83]
 

Originally by: Kuseka Adama
Words

The simple truth is that the game handled large numbers a lot better before the latest expansion. Also, it is the loading time when entering a system that is the big problem, normal battle lag hits both sides (sometimes equal to both sides, sometimes not). Finally, if you have 300 players that really wants to PvP and hurt the opponent, then you will use those 300 players when you defend your resources, even if the opponent only bring 50 pilots to the fight.

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:34:00 - [84]
 

Much better approach this second time around, and also EXTREMELY IMPROVED communications with us players in this thread. Thank you, CCP. Smile

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:37:00 - [85]
 

Originally by: Kuseka Adama
First off. WOOT thanks for addressing several of the concerns of players

My solution to lag: Weaken POS. Not just by a little...a TON make it so a large structure doesnt require more than ten capital ships to take down in a reasonable timeframe. (10-20 minutes or 1-2 siege cycles) Why do this? ...

May I be the first to disagree? Rather vehemently, rather.

A few posts earlier I already voiced my concern over CCP effectively more and more looking into ways to dismantle the existing EVE universe, just to keep things running. While I fully understand the rationale behind it, I think this is still a very bad road to go down on. What is next? Nerfe my Accelerated Ejection Bay, or my Bay Loading Accelerator rigs, just because my missiles are firing a bit too fast for CCP to keep up with? Or add more or longer 'forced-waiting' counters in the game? The game is supposed to get better each time, not worse! And yes, I suppose nerfing the heck out of what we have can be considered a form of making things 'better' too; but that's, ultimately, a rather warped reasoning (way beyond the 20AU barrier).

So, now we're gonna 'solve' the lag by needing just a handful of ships instead of a huge fleet? Tada! NOT! Honestly, I find it rather terrifying that people might now think this is actually a good idea. Please, CCP, don't. If you have to, pull some folks off the Dust 514 team, and fix EVE first. And, for Pete's sake, nerfe your own nerfing! It's unnerving.

Kuseka Adama
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:37:00 - [86]
 

Edited by: Kuseka Adama on 17/04/2010 02:45:29
Originally by: Ra Vhim
Originally by: Kuseka Adama
Words

The simple truth is that the game handled large numbers a lot better before the latest expansion. Also, it is the loading time when entering a system that is the big problem, normal battle lag hits both sides (sometimes equal to both sides, sometimes not). Finally, if you have 300 players that really wants to PvP and hurt the opponent, then you will use those 300 players when you defend your resources, even if the opponent only bring 50 pilots to the fight.



Assuming equal numbers if it only takes 50 people to knockout a POS your going to send your other pilots to hit other sites and those 300 players defending will probably be dispatched to other sights to defend as well. I know there are flaws in my proposal and what you state is one of them. But i try to work on equal grounds. Because quite frankly you cant make everything fair and making it fair on equal grounds is hard enough.
Quote:

May I be the first to disagree? Rather vehemently, rather.

A few posts earlier I already voiced my concern over CCP effectively more and more looking into ways to dismantle the existing EVE universe, just to keep things running. While I fully understand the rationale behind it, I think this is still a very bad road to go down on. What is next? Nerfe my Accelerated Ejection Bay, or my Bay Loading Accelerator rigs, just because my missiles are firing a bit too fast for CCP to keep up with? Or add more or longer 'forced-waiting' counters in the game? The game is supposed to get better each time, not worse! And yes, I suppose nerfing the heck out of what we have can be considered a form of making things 'better' too; but that's, ultimately, a rather warped reasoning (way beyond the 20AU barrier).

So, now we're gonna 'solve' the lag by needing just a handful of ships instead of a huge fleet? Tada! NOT! Honestly, I find it rather terrifying that people might now think this is actually a good idea. Please, CCP, don't. If you have to, pull some folks off the Dust 514 team, and fix EVE first. And, for Pete's sake, nerfe your own nerfing! It's unnerving.


Unfortunately i'm having this conversation on multiple levels so your not the first. However. I fully understand why you say what you are. And honestly in a perfect world i'd love to be able to have a 500 on 500 dogfight. The world aint perfect by any means and i'm just trying to find a temporary solution to one of the worst problems in the game. Open smaller based combat is a lot of fun. It really is. Even without direct ship controls you can still have a blast in such a scenario and skill wins the day. The situation isn't something you can throw omgwtf power at. And lets face it no MMO is EVER going to introduce a purely bug fix expansion. Not now not ever. So we're left with either *****ing about something that could take a year or more to fix and delaying everything CCP has. (and turning incarna to vaporware status) Or adjusting the scale to something the system can manage while CCP works on fixing the situation. This lag situation has already cost capital fleets and is a goddamned server exploit. I've stated that in multiple threads time and time again. CCP does not officially agree with my position. I dont know if they unofficially agree either. (given how -A- is allowed to operate in provi I can only assume they dont.) Regardless accept the fact that what you want will not happen. It simply wont. We'd all love to see it but no MMO company has the balls to do it. Not CCP not blizzard not Funcom not NCsoft not anyone.

Facepalm
Amarr
Battlestars
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:42:00 - [87]
 

Edited by: Facepalm on 17/04/2010 02:47:12
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

Sorry, yes - I didn't outline the reasons in this blog because Lemur and I covered them briefly the previous one:

Quote:
We've been debating what to do about these bookmarks since before Apocrypha was even released: with the new scanning system, ships in these locations are essentially invulnerable in the majority of situations, and they can be utilized by any ship without any inherent cost.

On top of this, in Tyrannis we're (hopefully!) removing the last of the various bugs that allow deep safes to be created. This will place us firmly into a situation where the only way to access locations outside the system proper will be via "legacy" bookmarks. This creates a division between older "haves" and newer "have-nots": as a new player coming into the game, the only way you'd be able to reach points outside the system proper would be to acquire a bookmark from an older player.

This is not something we're comfortable with, and we've now reached the point where we have both a solution we're happy with and the resources available to implement it.


In brief: the defect was fixed, a tidy-up was suggested, and we agreed that it was a good idea, mostly in order to level the playingfield going forward.


Still relying on that 'legacy' argument are we? I'm glad to hear T2 BPOs will be out along with DSSs then. They've been legacy in this game for a long long time now, been an unfair and unbalanced advantage, completely bypass an entire intentional sink and gameplay mechanic, been a source of major beefs from industrial folk, and completely impede anyone "new" from getting into the T2 production business in all but just a few areas. Yay, no more T2 BPOs!

Erichk Knaar
Caldari
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2010.04.17 02:50:00 - [88]
 

Quote:
The furthest bookmark is 5,900,000,000 AU (95,000 light years) from its sun. This is roughly the same distance as the diameter of the milky way


You guys should really consider keeping just this one for posterity. Thats pretty damn impressive.

Clansworth
Good Rock Materials
Posted - 2010.04.17 03:00:00 - [89]
 

I'm confused.. if they are just moving items in towards the sun until they are within [largest-orbit] + 20au, then what if that resultant point is outisde 10au from a celestial? will it all be blowed up and make much whinage?

:-) Sorry.. couldn't help it.

This is a better solution...

Also, to those complaining about the lag, how many of you have participated in the mass testing events? THIS is where you can help FIX the problem.

Samuel Samson
Posted - 2010.04.17 03:06:00 - [90]
 

Originally by: Facepalm
Still relying on that 'legacy' argument are we? I'm glad to hear T2 BPOs will be out along with DSSs then. They've been legacy in this game for a long long time now, been an unfair and unbalanced advantage, completely bypass an entire intentional sink and gameplay mechanic, been a source of major beefs from industrial folk, and completely impede anyone "new" from getting into the T2 production business in all but just a few areas. Yay, no more T2 BPOs!

Good Gawd.. if you think T2 BPO's are so game-breakingly valuable, then go freakin buy one. Trust me, they aren't, which is why most veteran owners have long since parted with them, not long after invention's introduction. I don't suppose you can figure out WHY that is... No.. I guessed not...


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (11)

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


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only