open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked EVE Online: Incursion 1.4 to be deployed Wednesday April 6, 2011
 
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 (65)

Author Topic

Rocius
Gradient
Electus Matari
Posted - 2011.04.02 13:29:00 - [121]
 

Originally by: Teranul
Edited by: Teranul on 02/04/2011 05:06:04
Someone really needs to watch the Fanfest art panel...


Thanks, I'll watch that when I get a spare 40 minutes. Hopefully soon. Would still be nice if CCP was a little more clear than mud with some of the descriptions with patch notes.

Originally by: Mashie Saldana
Hopefully yes, also at Fanfest CCP showed us arm tattoos so that will come once ready™.


Cool, just have to keep that little flame of hope alive :p

Jelek Coro
Erase Rewind
Posted - 2011.04.02 13:44:00 - [122]
 

Edited by: Jelek Coro on 02/04/2011 13:44:31
Originally by: Tippia
It already matters because NPC jamming already works that way and you can already fit ECCM to counteract it. No answer has been given by CCP as to what has actually changed here. If I were to (maliciously) guess, nothing has changed — they're just finally officially acknowledging a mechanic that has been in the game for several years. Neutral

So to answer your question: unless CCP has actually changed something, this announcement means nothing for Marauders, or indeed for any other common NPC-killing ship.


Stop talking crap. ECM from NPCs has always been random chance - what you fit can not counteract it.

ECCM does not and has not worked - now it will.

There is no evidence to the contrary.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.04.02 13:58:00 - [123]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 02/04/2011 14:02:30
Originally by: Jelek Coro
Stop talking crap. ECM from NPCs has always been random chance - what you fit can not counteract it.

ECCM does not and has not worked - now it will.

There is no evidence to the contrary.
Wrong on every point.

So until a dev comes in here and explains what they've actually changed, the only conclusion is that they're finally saying that "yes, this is how it works", not that they've recoded anything.

Erick Odin
Amarr
Local-Spike
Posted - 2011.04.02 15:01:00 - [124]
 

Whats up with all the mighty 0.0 alliance guys talking about quitting and going to empire? Anybody planning to fight for better space?

Th3bl4ckr4bbit
Posted - 2011.04.02 15:26:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: Erick Odin
Whats up with all the mighty 0.0 alliance guys talking about quitting and going to empire? Anybody planning to fight for better space?


Well if there is less isk in 0.0 people will move to empire ( jita 4-4 ) and start making isk there....

Ganking gives you isk for small risk and it gives pew pew .
It's gonna be fun as said " your choices always come back around " that was the message from the " future vision "

Sandrila
Posted - 2011.04.02 15:44:00 - [126]
 

Why should anyone start a fight? for annos? those systems will be permacamped by some neutrals..
It´s even harder for smaller Corps/Allys to get a footage into 0.0, cause no one is fighting for Angel-HUBS and i won´t pay any rent to a big Sov-holder for doing such annos...
Btw there will be no fight, smaller Corps get kicked or raged out if the big bosses want your space..

Mamba Lev
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.04.02 16:21:00 - [127]
 

NPC jamming can be countered by ECM, a) it should have been that way from the start and b) it serves no purpose but to annoy, doesn't add anything and just makes part of the game irritating. Find something else for caldari to do.

Tramadol Hydrochloride
Posted - 2011.04.02 16:24:00 - [128]
 

Ranting and personal attacks removed. Spitfire

ToXicPaIN
Minmatar
Strategic Solutions Ltd.
Huzzah Federation
Posted - 2011.04.02 17:11:00 - [129]
 

this patch SUCKS !!!!!


Halcyon Skyler
Posted - 2011.04.02 17:27:00 - [130]
 

No one seems to be offering alternatives here...

I think CCP's nullsec intention makes sense: make certain 0.0 systems better than others. That way large alliances have more to fight for, and small alliances have more scraps to start out in.

The goal seems twofold:

  • make bad truesec systems only appealing to small/weak alliances.

  • make good truesec systems more appealing to large alliances.



The problems achieving this goal are also twofold:

  • Large alliances supplement individual incomes through moon goo (via ship replacement, etc.) and likely hold enough space to keep members ratting anyway.

  • Small alliances only gain a foothold through ISK generation, which typically falls on the individual through ratting
  • .


Cutting all profitable sites (hubs are worse that missions) from 0.0 to -0.25 space will make those areas a wasteland. Small alliances won't have the income to support or defend those systems, and large alliances won't bother with them anyway.

The change to anoms needs to make bad truesec systems unappealing, but not useless and limited in capacity. Random ideas being:


  • Allow 1 haven in 0.0 to -0.25 instead of zero. That's still unappealing to a large alliance, but very useful to a small alliance

  • Ensure that at least one system in a constellation has a truesec between 0.45 and 0.65.

  • Keep the sites as-is, but adjust the quality of the rats that spawn based on truesec, reducing the net bounties / wallet tick.



To prevent entire regions from going empty, there needs to be a minimum level of utility in nullsec. Even a terrible system should be useful to a small number of pilots. No alliance will bankroll itself off hubs.

Finally, I don't see why CCP doesn't adjust the difficulty of anoms based on truesec. A sanctum that mostly spawns low-end battleship rats would prevent the psychological impact of losing the sites, while still reducing the utility of systems and ISK entering the game.

mkmin
Posted - 2011.04.02 17:43:00 - [131]
 

Originally by: Halcyon Skyler
No one seems to be offering alternatives here...

*a bunch of ideas about how to make this suck less*



Your ideas are alright, except
1: lower truesec already is more valuable. There is a greater chance of multi-billion isk loot drops, better belt rats to the extent it's actually worth doing, and a bunch of other extremely valuable advantages most of us will never ever ever ever see (especially now that devs are cheating for them so they can hold it that much easier.)
2: Your good ideas would require effort and balance. Team Half-Ass lacks the competency to do either. They are doing this because it's easy, and it's proof that they wouldn't understand balance if it mounted them and went to town.
3: The devs were flat out lying about their goals. The only way this makes perfect sense, especially in context of other things they have said and done is if they are trying to drive up PLEX sales. They realize the big alliances have the isk stockpiles to survive quite a while without PLEX, but the small guys with small isk supplies would need PLEX to continue with what they're doing or relinquish trillions of isk of assets and thousands of man-hours (game-wide.) Expect this to lead to a PLEX-for-Titans "feature".

Halcyon Skyler
Posted - 2011.04.02 18:50:00 - [132]
 

Originally by: mkmin
2: Your good ideas would require effort and balance.


I'd be happy with just "0.0 to -0.25 keep one haven." That seems easy enough.

But you're right, CCP is doing this because too much money is entering the game from nowhere. As much as we'll complain about changes, they are a business and need to keep an old game profitable. In the long-run people won't care about not having sanctums in certain areas.

That said, the approach here is ham-fisted and very damaging to new 0.0 players. If CCP wants to reduce ratting income, tie bounties to truesec with the average being lower. Players need to support themselves in 0.0, otherwise they won't fight for it. Truesec should affect the number of players that a system can support, not the ability to support players at all. CCP is going too far by stripping all profitable sites from a large percentage of systems.

kKayron Jarvis
Caldari
Tech 3 Constructions
Posted - 2011.04.02 19:35:00 - [133]
 

Wen is the DIGIPASS GO 6 go live?Question

Abinadi9
NerdHerd
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.04.02 19:49:00 - [134]
 

Well in my opinion, people who played by the rules for the past 17 months are now being punished. Visit http://www.evethink.com. Go there, vote if you want or do not want this change. It is API verified so only one vote per account. Go there, vote, then change your API if you're worried about security. It is important that we show CCP that not just a select few but MOST PEOPLE are opposed to this nerf.

Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.04.02 20:17:00 - [135]
 

Originally by: Erick Odin
Whats up with all the mighty 0.0 alliance guys talking about quitting and going to empire? Anybody planning to fight for better space?


Alliance don't fight for anomalies or access to belt rats, contrary to whatever 'models' CCP allegedly has. I assume these are the same models which suggest that people will fight harder when they have less income. Individuals and corporations who will not be able to make ends meet in nullsec and who won't want to have to jump clone to Empire for lovely mission grinding when they're not being wardecced will simply join alliances which do have access to useful space.

CRA5HD0WN
Caldari
Posted - 2011.04.02 22:35:00 - [136]
 

Edited by: CRA5HD0WN on 02/04/2011 22:36:00
This patch list seems so miniscale... some things should have prob been here way earlier this year but I suppose CCP has to wait us out on something.

GambbiT
Posted - 2011.04.02 22:41:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: GambbiT on 02/04/2011 23:39:41
well probably some alliance will loose renters, drone region wont be affected bots will still rule in belts. but hey we can all join NC, nice and warm there , bff forever and we gone be smack by the rest of the 15% eve null sec . o well ccp scuks time after time again and again and again and again and again and again and again, and we still pay for our subscrition

Xorth Adimus
Caldari
Blackwater USA Inc.
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2011.04.03 00:38:00 - [138]
 

'The Flycatchers' bonus to Light Missile damage reduction factor per level has been changed to a missile explosion velocity bonus per level.'

What a joke, Flycatchers cannot seriously fit launchers or even rockets due to the fitting requirements, and if you want to just fit one extender and probe launcher lol. And fit std launchers to kill ships lol. More April fools.

Make this bonus a 10% bonus for missile and rocket explosion velocity per lvl and reduce the fitting requirements of rockets to that for small A/cs and I'll be happy.

Whilst you are at it put another low on all dictors except sabres. This is just as unlikely.

Ordo Akin
Posted - 2011.04.03 03:54:00 - [139]
 

Fixing lag is a good thing.

Taking away the cookies after you already gave them out is a bad thing.

Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
Posted - 2011.04.03 05:56:00 - [140]
 

Thank you for rebalancing Tech moons, CCP.

CCP Clueless succeeds at being as useless as it gets.

Terminal Entry
New Fnord Industries
Posted - 2011.04.03 07:27:00 - [141]
 

Edited by: Terminal Entry on 03/04/2011 07:36:41
Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 02/04/2011 14:02:30
Originally by: Jelek Coro
Stop talking crap. ECM from NPCs has always been random chance - what you fit can not counteract it.

ECCM does not and has not worked - now it will.

There is no evidence to the contrary.
Wrong on every point.

So until a dev comes in here and explains what they've actually changed, the only conclusion is that they're finally saying that "yes, this is how it works", not that they've recoded anything.


Didn't see any Dev posts in that thread confirming they had done a stealth nerf/buff.

But we do have the patch notes saying "...you can now fit your ship to counteract them" which seems to suggest that you couldn't before.

When it comes to things like this I tend to believe CCP (naively?) as opposed to a non-CCP person, who looks more and more like a troll.

Term.

P.S. A link to a Dev explaining how NPC Jamming works.

Alice Katsuko
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.04.03 08:31:00 - [142]
 

Originally by: CRA5HD0WN
Edited by: CRA5HD0WN on 02/04/2011 22:36:00
This patch list seems so miniscale... some things should have prob been here way earlier this year but I suppose CCP has to wait us out on something.


Dunno. I suspect that some of the seemingly-minor changes might have been surprisingly hard to code. More than that, most of the quality of life changes, from improving server and client performance to adding more default overviews to making the UI more user friendly are always very welcome. For that matter, while I may quite vehemently disagree with the manner in which the changes to nullsec space have been implemented, the underlying goals, both stated and unstated, are far from terrible.

crymyname
Posted - 2011.04.03 09:30:00 - [143]
 

there is a problem and we see that a lot of people see it ...
but when they start to leave because ccp has been seen to make to many mistakes ...will they come back ??
as some have said people will move into mining .. and as such ore prices will fall and as ships wont be needed as fast the whole of eve economy will stall and die and more will leave ...

CCP BE VERY CAREFUL ON WHAT YOUR ABOUT TO DO ...

Samuel Wess
Posted - 2011.04.03 11:22:00 - [144]
 

Maybe try not to put the big clouds and annoying lights in all new plexes, so I can actually enjoy the plex not zoomed out to max ?

Also when will be an option to reduce sun intensity so i don't have to use my ship always to block it ? I know i have a problem staring at an intense light for long periods!

Rasz Lin
Caldari
Uitraan Diversified Holdings Incorporated
Posted - 2011.04.03 11:22:00 - [145]
 

"The new search function for contracts has left beta and the old search has been removed."


PLEASE DONT

Having 2 separate contract search windows is great. I can use old one to list particular region contracts, and If i find something interesting I can click "find in contracts" on it to compare global prices. This will be impossible when 1.4 removes old search :(

CCP created something good (above scenario) by accident, but sadly they are about to "fix it" :(

Lemming Alpha1dash1
Lemmings Online
Posted - 2011.04.03 11:47:00 - [146]
 

Amarr robe has been improved.

I'm guessing Amarr players requested for robe flashing ugh

Kuni Wah
Posted - 2011.04.03 12:06:00 - [147]
 

Originally by: Kuni Wah
Edited by: Kuni Wah on 01/04/2011 16:42:26
Are any of the updates in this patch going to stop those with non shader 3 set-ups logging back in after it?

(Yes i know this is the date that anything less than S3 is no longer supported so this isnt a complaint, more a heads-up to any others like myself who are in the process of upgrading their rig.)


as the above post doesnt seem to warrant a response from CCP, i guess all of us with 'older' set-ups dont matter anymore.

Terminal Entry
New Fnord Industries
Posted - 2011.04.03 13:20:00 - [148]
 

Originally by: Kuni Wah
Originally by: Kuni Wah
Edited by: Kuni Wah on 01/04/2011 16:42:26
Are any of the updates in this patch going to stop those with non shader 3 set-ups logging back in after it?

(Yes i know this is the date that anything less than S3 is no longer supported so this isnt a complaint, more a heads-up to any others like myself who are in the process of upgrading their rig.)


as the above post doesnt seem to warrant a response from CCP, i guess all of us with 'older' set-ups dont matter anymore.


There was an announcement in one of the Fanfest presentations. From memory, they said they wouldn't stop shader model 2 clients form logging in but they wouldn't be giving any support to any problems encountered. I think there was time limit as well of 6 months. If my memory servers me correctly they also said about 0.6% of all loggins was from clients with shader 2.

Lee Anderson
Eternal Profiteers
Posted - 2011.04.03 13:28:00 - [149]
 

Originally by: Skaarl
Originally by: CCP Fallout
Originally by: XFluke

Sad, really sad... i dont want a great looking game.. i want a fun game. LAG is so bad in major fleet battles that you cant even load grid... What about that??? ALL you care is nerfing the good and fun things on eve and not fixing the REAL issues.




This would be a good opportunity to point out the myriad blogs we recently published on this very issue. The War on Lag is something we take very seriously, and we are constantly in the trenches fighting it.

Suite of Upgrades to the TQ database - Yokai details a ton of upgrades we've made to Tranquility recently

Flow Control is a new thing we've added, and Mort's blog gives the juicy details

Missiles still hate Veritas' hamsters, but he's winning that war

This page also details some of the things we've introduced with EVE Online: Incursion.



reminding people that in x days, c hours x min and x seconds your going to screw over massive amounts of your customers may not be the best way to handle these changes.


Why do you pay for the game if its so bad? I been playing almost 3 years and CCP has done a great job so stop QQing/trollingRolling Eyes

Striker4ever
Gallente
Nex Exercitus
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.04.03 13:39:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: CCP Fallout
Originally by: XFluke

Sad, really sad... i dont want a great looking game.. i want a fun game. LAG is so bad in major fleet battles that you cant even load grid... What about that??? ALL you care is nerfing the good and fun things on eve and not fixing the REAL issues.




This would be a good opportunity to point out the myriad blogs we recently published on this very issue. The War on Lag is something we take very seriously, and we are constantly in the trenches fighting it.

Suite of Upgrades to the TQ database - Yokai details a ton of upgrades we've made to Tranquility recently

Flow Control is a new thing we've added, and Mort's blog gives the juicy details

Missiles still hate Veritas' hamsters, but he's winning that war

This page also details some of the things we've introduced with EVE Online: Incursion.




OK recently i was in a fleet battle of 500+ in F-D49d. The lag wasn't bad but it could have been better with command delays about 30sec to 1min. Compared to fleet battles like o2o and PNQ where system is loaded with over 1000. Hopefully CCP continues to push faster towards a higher goal considering most massive fleet battles ive been in are always over 1000. while a regular fleet battle usually is 400+ in system


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 ... : last (65)

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