open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Singularity 'The Rules They Are A-Changin'
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

Author Topic

Kepakh
Posted - 2011.02.20 14:37:00 - [61]
 

Originally by: CCP Oneiromancer

Enforcing rules on Singularity has become an increasingly difficult and time-consuming task in the last few months as the increase in the number of players using the test server has led to an increase in incidents. This leads to a bad experience for you


Increased population on test server? Compared to what year? 2003?

If anything is contributing bad player experience on test server, it isn't population increase which did not change much in past years but mostly CCP being reluctant in enforcing server rules.


Originally by: CCP Oneiromancer

We would like to see more diverse engagements on the test server and if someone is being a jerk


Because blobbing and FFA camping makes the engagements so diverse... If I wanted to deal with this type of 'jerks', I can stay on TQ.




Just one more bullcrap dev blog...

Cresalle
Posted - 2011.02.20 16:21:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Tres Farmer
Originally by: Cresalle
Here's a novel idea:

No rules on SiSi.

Sisi is not a shoot-at-what-you-want environment.. it's a test-what-you-want-to-test environment WITHOUT disturbing others peoples tests.


Here's a novel idea:

No rules on SiSi.

Niveon
Posted - 2011.02.20 21:34:00 - [63]
 

ITT: Cresalle going for a permaban before the new rules even come in.

The Snowman
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2011.02.21 10:11:00 - [64]
 

So, I have a philisophical question / point about this.

If your spending too much time enforcing rules, how does creating more rules resolve the issue?

Usually when CCP wants to do something to save time they create tools that alow them to more easily do things, like corification. But changing or adding more rules for people to disobey doesn't seem a logical way to combat the problem.

Morgenholt Blue
RED.Legion
Posted - 2011.02.21 10:27:00 - [65]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: CCP Oneiromancer

Enforcing rules on Singularity has become an increasingly difficult and time-consuming task in the last few months as the increase in the number of players using the test server has led to an increase in incidents. This leads to a bad experience for you


Increased population on test server? Compared to what year? 2003?

If anything is contributing bad player experience on test server, it isn't population increase which did not change much in past years but mostly CCP being reluctant in enforcing server rules.


Originally by: CCP Oneiromancer

We would like to see more diverse engagements on the test server and if someone is being a jerk


Because blobbing and FFA camping makes the engagements so diverse... If I wanted to deal with this type of 'jerks', I can stay on TQ.




Just one more bullcrap dev blog...


Your tears fuel my test server ships. I can has your test server stuffs?

Kepakh
Posted - 2011.02.21 10:29:00 - [66]
 

Originally by: The Snowman

If your spending too much time enforcing rules, how does creating more rules resolve the issue?



More? Where do you read they are adding more rules?

In fact there is less rules they will be (supposedly)enforcing than was before. They only made the rules they do not enforce enough now to be rules not to be enforced.



People get confused so easily...

The Snowman
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2011.02.21 12:54:00 - [67]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: The Snowman

If your spending too much time enforcing rules, how does creating more rules resolve the issue?



More? Where do you read they are adding more rules?




They all look like new rules to me, the only rule I see which can be considerd 'less' is the podding. Which is only an alteration to an existing rule not a removal.

In fact they all look to me like just slight contextual alterations to existing rules.

Still, I believe the point is still the same.. Test server is seeing an increase in users, which they HAVE asked for, but the increase is causing the increase in police work. So altering, amending or changing the 'rules' is merly delaying a problem. it doesnt solve the problem.

Take the podding rule, why not just create something that prevents pod-targetting? bang.. no more threads or complaints or requests associated with podding ever again. That is a solution... just saying "oh you can pod now but dont do it too often" is NOT a solution.

Kepakh
Posted - 2011.02.21 16:07:00 - [68]
 

Originally by: The Snowman

Still, I believe the point is still the same..


What point?

1) New rules means LESS rules to enforce. Period.
2) Sisi population isn't increasing in any important numbers. What might be increasing is number of 'incidents' but that is only because CCP isn't enforcing server rules enough for past years.

In other words, they don't give a damn and they made it official now.





Sh0rt3y
Posted - 2011.02.23 00:38:00 - [69]
 

I believe there should be a new Sticky -- Permma Banned Players.

Make a sticky of the people who have disrupted the server, which would also scare others into not being complete douches. Also would show others that your not messing around with the rules anymore. And would be cool to ogle at those dumb enough to receive one. MUAAHAHHAHAHATwisted EvilTwisted Evil

Radakos
Posted - 2011.02.23 14:30:00 - [70]
 

THIS IS NOW A WIDOT THREAD!

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2011.02.24 04:46:00 - [71]
 

A bit late to the thread, but nice blog, Oneiro. Thanks for the great job y'all are doing with the test server. It's a great resource.

Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
Posted - 2011.02.24 04:50:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Tres Farmer on 24/02/2011 04:52:27
Originally by: The Snowman
Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: The Snowman

If your spending too much time enforcing rules, how does creating more rules resolve the issue?

More? Where do you read they are adding more rules?

They all look like new rules to me, the only rule I see which can be considerd 'less' is the podding. Which is only an alteration to an existing rule not a removal.

In fact they all look to me like just slight contextual alterations to existing rules.

Still, I believe the point is still the same.. Test server is seeing an increase in users, which they HAVE asked for, but the increase is causing the increase in police work. So altering, amending or changing the 'rules' is merly delaying a problem. it doesnt solve the problem.

Take the podding rule, why not just create something that prevents pod-targetting? bang.. no more threads or complaints or requests associated with podding ever again. That is a solution... just saying "oh you can pod now but dont do it too often" is NOT a solution.

And how do you find bugs related to targeting/shooting pods then?!

The problem here is simply that Sisi is put into place as a testing platform to (bug)test ALL gamemechanics and that some morons can't leave other testers alone who do their non-combat testing.

If those guys who disturb others peoples test would for example find nothing to buy on the market (somebody bought all stuff) this would be regarded as disturbance of their testing. It's the same thing as unconsentually killing a ship not in a dedicated combat zone.

CCP Habakuk

Posted - 2011.02.24 15:18:00 - [73]
 

Edited by: CCP Habakuk on 24/02/2011 15:18:46
These rule-changes are now active on Singularity! The new rules can be found also at http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Test_server_rules.

Regarding the seeding of faction items and ships on the market: We identified the problem, but it was not possible to fix it in time for this mirror. Crying or Very sad

Stormchyld
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.02.24 18:10:00 - [74]
 

I'll post this Q in the thread about doomsday testing alliance as well as here but is xzh still where we can build scaps? ..thnks

R0Y4L
Caldari
Scifried
Strategic Military Industries
Posted - 2011.02.25 03:25:00 - [75]
 

are carriers/dreads allwed to fight in the frig/bc/bs rooms ??? ... 3 carriers just tore through everything in the BC/BS room before we could blink ...

Kepakh
Posted - 2011.02.25 07:30:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: R0Y4L
are carriers/dreads allwed to fight in the frig/bc/bs rooms ??? ... 3 carriers just tore through everything in the BC/BS room before we could blink ...

Yes, they are. There is only single rule for 6-CZ49:

No fighting or other aggressive actions at the station and gates (no targeted or AoE warp inhibiting modules).


So the system is full FFA except stations and gates. I guess discussing how meaningless and stupid it isn't necessary as it is obvious to anyone with half a brain working... CCP fails so badly lately, unbelievable.

Selene D'Celeste
Caldari
The D'Celeste Trading Company
ISK Six
Posted - 2011.02.25 13:20:00 - [77]
 

Quite a few of these problems could be addressed by custom gameplay mechanics deployed to Singularity , which would completely eliminate the abuse and thus the need to deal with it. If you're really thinking long-term solution, a Singularity ruleset patch to go on top of any TQ build when deploying to Singularity should be developed.

Tordin Varglund
Minmatar
Vivicide
Posted - 2011.02.25 23:29:00 - [78]
 

Edited by: Tordin Varglund on 25/02/2011 23:30:51
Edited by: Tordin Varglund on 25/02/2011 23:30:21
holy **** these are some ******ed changes ccp please go **** yourself in the face. You basically ruined the test server. It has no value anymore when you can even enter the system without being caught in a bubble and ****d by a blob.. Its not like the FFA1 gangs of old didnt allready limited testing new setups, but this is just dumb.

Tordin Varglund
Minmatar
Vivicide
Posted - 2011.02.25 23:32:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Tordin Varglund on 25/02/2011 23:32:46
and how exactly does poding limit testing? its not exactly a mechanic that needs further testing is it? if you want to do some mass testing or whatever then just allow it temporarily. the old rules were fine.

ZAKARIUS
Ministry of Destruction
P I R A T E S
Posted - 2011.02.26 13:29:00 - [80]
 

Edited by: ZAKARIUS on 26/02/2011 14:10:54
OMG!

What was wrong with the old FFA system?
At least we could take a ship into an area where we actually stood a chance to test it against like for like.
The test server is not just for CCP to f**k around changing stuff at will, its for ''US the paying customer''to test ship fittings and now u have taken this away from us.

How do u expect us to test anything?
I was on there last night and bubbles all over the place, blobs everywhere and just a basic f**k up all round. You might as well close the test server altogether because its now useless!!
Stop f**king around changing s**t all the time and concentrate on fixing known issues in the game i.e. right clicking someone only to get 30 second lag while the standings load is very annoying!

We pay your wages and then you say to us ''we dont have time or resources to run it anymore, so do as u please''?

IDIOTS!!!

p.s. i bet u got time to ban me from the forums eh?

Kepakh
Posted - 2011.02.26 15:54:00 - [81]
 

Edited by: Kepakh on 26/02/2011 17:17:30
Edited by: Kepakh on 26/02/2011 15:54:33
Originally by: ZAKARIUS

The test server is not just for CCP to f**k around changing stuff at will


Actually, that is exactly what test server is for. The fact you could log in there and test your fittings is a privilege, something you do not pay for. It is a privilege and CCP has no obligation in this regards, period.




The biggest problem is the whole idiocy of the rules as the current setup is entirely pointless. It does not add anything to testing environment, it does not improve it and it does not help handling of rule breaking.

The new rules are annoying only.

CCP Masheen

Posted - 2011.02.26 16:57:00 - [82]
 

Originally by: ZAKARIUS


IDIOTS!!!




oh you charmer you Shocked

captian valsalis
Posted - 2011.02.26 17:26:00 - [83]
 

the new rules in sisi is absolutly out of order and it's no long a test server more of a being ganked by noobs server now there is no concencual fighting and the whole system is a ffa witch is out of order i can no longer teat fit's becuase i get ganked and can no longer even watch people fight in combat areas as there for some reason not concencual fighting areas the sisi rules stick and need to be sorted i'm very very unhappy about the way this has been done something should be changed and podding once again should be not allowed as people are abusing it and ccp/devs are doing nothing about it

Comodore John
Gallente
Trixi IFI
Posted - 2011.02.26 17:42:00 - [84]
 

Originally by: captian valsalis
the new rules in sisi is absolutly out of order and it's no long a test server more of a being ganked by noobs server now there is no concencual fighting and the whole system is a ffa witch is out of order i can no longer teat fit's becuase i get ganked and can no longer even watch people fight in combat areas as there for some reason not concencual fighting areas the sisi rules stick and need to be sorted i'm very very unhappy about the way this has been done something should be changed and podding once again should be not allowed as people are abusing it and ccp/devs are doing nothing about it


Order shall be restored soon

Tehlana Riolis
Posted - 2011.02.26 23:48:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: Tehlana Riolis on 26/02/2011 23:58:36
Edited by: Tehlana Riolis on 26/02/2011 23:55:08
Originally by: CCP Oneiromancer Dev Blog
Blablabla

TL;DR: We are too lazy/cba and don`t like seeing all the ban requests so we removed all but 2 rules so we don`t have to do ****.
Have fun testing stuff now when in bc/bs ffa there are dreads waiting for stuff to alpha , to name a few ... Only reason I`d see people giving a damn about SP from mass tests would be to get in cap and camp something . HF ppl.
Also I`m not mad br0/any-other-idiotic-meme. Just hope those that made these decisions don`t make decisions on TQ or I`ll have to start looking for a new game soon.
EDIT: O wait ... thats too late ... guess this is a test server for them too ... how much can i **** up a server kinda test . You`r on the righht way .
LocalGuy> Anyway, all you cruiser+ size stuff in FFA4, GO AWAY SO I CAN SMART BOMB FRIGS <- good job on new rules . Like to see now how much input on bugs you`ll get from players like that. gg. [:lol:

zxsteel
Gallente
Darkness Of Absolution
Posted - 2011.02.27 00:46:00 - [86]
 

I know how busy QA, CCP, GM and BH testing for bugs. I think we need to have more support, maybe getting more volunteers on test server "few". Take in feedback and pass it along to CCP who needs to see it. Not only will this up the speed, but help do more common things. Also asking to know if other system would be set up like old FD- not "guide beacons". Shocked

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.02.27 01:47:00 - [87]
 

good job,

and thanks for all the work and its cool to have sigularity to exist with its seperate goals and purposes (even if i havn't used it much lately)

Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
The KWFL Republic
Posted - 2011.02.27 04:54:00 - [88]
 

Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 27/02/2011 05:16:51
OK, looks like the dev blog has been edited since the last time I read it.

Are the BF/CA areas consentual combat only? Or is it now completely impossible to get a 1v1 in this system?
Last time I read this blog there was a post along the lines of 'If you want to have a ship class battle, have one at a combat area', implying that to fight in a combat area you needed consent.

(Don't say fight at a safespot, as people scan you down and interrupt your fight there too)

-----------

Some of these rule changes I like, bombs, bubbles, podding etc.

New FFA system is awful, t's the exact same setup as 5 yrs ago. BC's need an area they can go to where BS are restricted, there's not much point flying to the BS/BC FFA in a BC cause it just gets murdered by 1200+dps BS with hundreds of thousands EHP.

As far as this, vigilante justice thing you have for overasize ships. Well that's fine when it's a sniper BS or something in the cruiser class, that's easy to fix, a few cruisers can team up and get rid of the problem, or one person can just get in a bigger BS and pop the annoyance.

Cap ships in BS FFA is not so easy, not everyone can just hop in a supercap or dread and remove the problem on their own, and it certainly takes more than a few BS to kill a nyx in any reasonable amount of time.
What the hell do you suggest, scary lady, for when there is 3 ships total in BS FFA and one of them is an archon?

The solution is easy, and requires no harassment of CCP staff.
Make 2 combat systems next door to each other. One is cap system where everything is seeded on market and there is one FFA for capships and below

Other system is subcap only, enforce this by not seeding capitals on the local market.
Then make a script that wipes all current POS, spawns CCP alliance POS on every moon so nobody can build capships there, and then spawn a cyno jammer in each POS. Have this script run @ cluster ctartup.

Problem solved. Fits with your model of 'more like TQ' also, because there are plenty of systems where combat happens with cynojammers active.

Mirabella Angelique
Posted - 2011.02.27 16:49:00 - [89]
 

Dear CCP Sisi Devs,

As you may or may not know, pilots have already misinterpreted your rules. Primary example is Combat system rules:

1. No fighting or other aggressive actions at the station and gates (no targeted or AoE warp inhibiting modules). It's the wild west now. Pilots are saying "CCP doesn't care. We can do whatever we want." And they are. Station fighting is out of control. It is spawn camping gone wild. Which I understand is null sec etc. I know you guys are busy, but even the appearance of CCP enforcing rules kept people at bay. Your admission to "we are too busy" may back fire on you in the end. I guess change is sometimes difficult to cope with. I'll do my best.

Copine Callmeknau
Kangaroos With Frickin Lazerbeams
The KWFL Republic
Posted - 2011.02.28 09:21:00 - [90]
 

Just warped to BS/BC FFA.

Moros, Phoenix, Nyx in there, all ganging up on a single geddon.
Warped my cane out before I got pwned.

Not going to bother logging onto SiSi any more. Totally FUBAR with CCP's new 'We're too lazy to write a simple script to fix things' approach.

Ah well, glad for the extra 8gb space on my drive I guess.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4

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