open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Bloggers #44, Tuxford's Revelations Recap and other Related Ramblings
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

CCP kieron

Posted - 2007.01.09 19:38:00 - [1]
 

The blog that Tux said was ready for posting before Christmas has been reviewed, revised and determined to be ready for publishing. Rigs, boosters, some information about Revelations II and more are included in the new blog.

Ramblings from Tux.

Xenex McScott
Caldari
Globaltech Industries
The ENTITY.
Posted - 2007.01.09 19:46:00 - [2]
 

Uh oh, sounds to me like another grudge match between QA and Content coming up again.

Content: HAHA, we made Kali 2 Betta than you did by making the NPCs less but more powerful.

QA: nuh uh, we coded them better with smarter AI and we reduced lag so thats why Kali 2 is better.

Beyond that, EXCELLENT blog by Tuxford. I look forward to more info from the other Devs too!

Hakera
Freelance Unincorporated
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2007.01.09 20:21:00 - [3]
 

His thoughts on npcs were very interesting, and tbh Ive been mulling over the current spawn dynamics for a while (their size, type, security status, effects) honestly I felt the -0.5 to -1.0 spawns were far too easy and to help encourage group play the dmg output or size of spawn should increase. Assuming you want to drop spawn numbers, so instead of 5 bs, 10 cruisers, 5 frigs you might get 2 BS, 5 cruisers, 2 frigs, but with all boosted stats to compensate, you would have to alter loot mechanics as well to similarly compensate for the lower amount of wrecks, ie increase the salvagable componant per wreck table.

I would have to table the thought of the return of the drone hive mother npcs again which were extremely tough tanks to break, I guess as long as the dmg stats are scaled, the respawn timers adjusted to compensate for fewer npc's it should work out ok.

On a more complex note I was mulling over the npc aggressor response, it basically shoots one target and keeps shooting it until that ship is destroyed or leaves. maybe we should entertain some thought into allowing the npc's to take on more complex behavior after they are adjusted so their are fewer but that would then increase server load.

Well anyhoooo, Oveur did promise me smack talking NPC's one day :)

Galldar
The Python Cartel.
The Jerk Cartel
Posted - 2007.01.09 20:25:00 - [4]
 

Did I read that right? you can now cloak while droping a cyno field?

Ithaca
Gallente
Maelstrom Crew
Paradigm Alliance
Posted - 2007.01.09 20:37:00 - [5]
 

Still no comment on invention then guys?
Is it working as intended?
is it pre nerfed?

Some sort of dev response to this would be very welcome.

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2007.01.09 20:48:00 - [6]
 

Thanks for the bloggy, Tux.

Quote:
Similar changes can be made with NPCs, such as reducing the number of NPCs and increasing their strengths, bounties, loot and salvage materials accordingly. To be honest I think we should do that regardless, as I often find it a tad silly that with a single ship I can warp to a complex and clean out something like 100 ships in total - in an assault ship.


\o/

This also should have positive ramifications for the whole PvEer / Pirate dynamic too.

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2007.01.09 21:15:00 - [7]
 

Tuxford, I may as well ask...

You talked about some possible NOS changes several months ago...is that off the planning board now?

Erotic Irony
0bsession
Posted - 2007.01.09 21:53:00 - [8]
 

No joy for Amarr?

While I like the mission changes, fewer but but more valuable and tougher npcs, I think complex npcs are way too easy. The destroyers and bcs have such high sig radii that they are one volleyed and don't pose a threat at all--either give more npcs webbing and scrambling or ramp up the difficulty some other way.

That said, is the "big focus" on warfare in K2 mean we are going to see diminished returns on focus fire?

Exclamation

Andargor theWise
Collateral Damage Unlimited
Posted - 2007.01.10 01:19:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Andargor theWise on 10/01/2007 01:16:21

Originally by: Tux

I looked at the issue with cynosural fields and cloaking devices. This bug is a perfect example of how a seemingly trivial shortcut can come back to bite you in the ass later. You might think at first that we don't really care about this bug, but we have actually tried a number of fixes. Some have simply not worked, while others have broken stuff more badly than this bug did. I can say with reasonable confidence that it's now been fixed internally, and we managed to not break anything.



Cool! Now we can discuss why a recon ship that can't move is a bad idea. Hence, no one is going to be dropping cynos with recons, and will continue to use alts in T1 frigates. (no, no one will deploy a support fleet to keep the recon alive just to move cap ships around, and the cap ships won't stick around either)

Please give recons a role and survivability by changing the cyno generator to a launcher and probe.

Reatu Krentor
Minmatar
Void Spiders
Fate Weavers
Posted - 2007.01.10 01:43:00 - [10]
 

While it is nice to see that you fixed the current cyno/cloak issues, I am still wondering if you also looked at the design behind it.
I believe that immobilizing someone for any reason should be avoided as much as possible and not be because it's necessary but rather because of a design decision. A good example of this could be the Dreadnought siege mode. Siege mode immobilizing the dread is not necessary for it to work. It is a game design choice to immobilize it.
For cynosural field on the other hand I believe it is not because of a game design choice but because it is necessary for the jumping ship to have an anchor in the target system. Making a ship nothing more then a target for a jump(and a target for everyone in the target system) makes it so that people would rather just use a disposable with a disposable character of which they don't care if he lives or dies.
Can an idea like is linked to in my sig not be considered over the current cynosural field mechanics? I would like to know Smile.

Bijou delaJewel
Posted - 2007.01.10 01:56:00 - [11]
 

I for one would like to give a big Kudos to Tux and CCP. The more and more play this game the more I am amazed buy the balancing act that the devs do day in and day out.

Now that being said... :) Drones? Where is the love?

Madeline Wickwor
Amarr
Unicorns and Rainbows
Posted - 2007.01.10 03:34:00 - [12]
 

I have respect for Tux and all Devs. However the words Kali II or Revelations II should never be mentioned until the bugs from everything else are fixed or I would probably settle for acknowledged atm.

If every single resource was not dedicated to bug fixing and petitions at the moment i would be incredibly dissapointed.

Naran Darkmood
Gallente
BlackSite Prophecy
101010 Alliance
Posted - 2007.01.10 07:38:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Bijou delaJewel
Now that being said... :) Drones? Where is the love?


I'd be enough for me if they stop hating drones...
I had it yesterday again, I set my sentries to attack a single target, and suddenly 5 rats start taking damage.
It hasn't become better with the patch, but worse.

/emote
Help, I start whining on this forum!

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2007.01.10 07:57:00 - [14]
 


Optimizations - very good!
Fixing blob - even better!
Changing npc numbers in missions - great!

Is this really a Tuxford blog? Because it makes me happy, not sad... Razz

Seriously, keep up the good work guys...sounds like you know what needs fixing. Smile

Toqua
Caldari
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.01.10 09:52:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Galldar
Did I read that right? you can now cloak while droping a cyno field?


No. The DEV's seem to have taken a shortcut putting the Cynofield Generator in the existing Cloaktype-Group... and since you can not use 2 cloaking devices at once.... you were not able to put on a f.e. force recon ship (which has covop cloak capability + bonuses for cynofield generation) a covert ops cloak AND a Cyno Generator at once... you had to refit it first (totally stupid, because the Force Recon is _made_ for the task to get behind enemy lines undetected and start there a Cyno Field for the Friendly Neighbourhood Titan waiting a few Lightyears away to open a Jumpbridge for a nice invading force.... Twisted EvilTwisted Evil)

It looks like CCP found the error they did finally in the root and pulled it...


Bartholomeus Crane
Gallente
The Crane Family
Posted - 2007.01.10 12:04:00 - [16]
 

Not even a single mention about drones.

Pretty please, with sugar on top, some love for the drones?

Shemar
Gallente
Photesthetics
Glamour Syndicate
Posted - 2007.01.10 12:21:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Madeline Wickwor
I have respect for Tux and all Devs. However the words Kali II or Revelations II should never be mentioned until the bugs from everything else are fixed or I would probably settle for acknowledged atm.

If every single resource was not dedicated to bug fixing and petitions at the moment i would be incredibly dissapointed.
I don't know how long you have been playing EVE, but I'd learn to live with the dissapointment. I have Evil or Very Mad

Unfortunately, as you can see from the recent blogs and news, CCP was busy creating a 50k player network infrastructure while basic gamepley features like mail and zoom are still broken (not to mention the mess with the new features). These have been characterised as 'minor' issues.

Originally by: Jim McGregor
Seriously, keep up the good work guys...sounds like you know what needs fixing. Smile
Now if only they'd get on with the fixing... Rolling Eyes

I know there is a lot of people that get mesmerized by the shiny new stuff CCP promises. All I want is "please don't break any more stuff while you try to attract even more customers with even smaller attention spans".

Ilor Prophet
Posted - 2007.01.10 16:18:00 - [18]
 

I'm not sure what you mean by smaller attention spans, but as lot of the stuff in the latest release caters to the patient. long-term player. Accruing enough salvage components to build a rig, using exploration to sniff out hidden complexes and encounters, and going through the time, effort, and expense to try to reverse engineer something with invention are all targeted at the player willing to invest time in the game.

Shemar
Gallente
Photesthetics
Glamour Syndicate
Posted - 2007.01.10 16:38:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Ilor Prophet
I'm not sure what you mean by smaller attention spans
I mean the "give me new cool stuff often or I'll quit the game" crowd.

As opposed to the "please stop adding to the game until you sort out all the bugs, even if it means there is absolutely nothing new for years" minority, to which I belong.

Jas Dor
Minmatar
Posted - 2007.01.10 17:57:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Erotic Irony
No joy for Amarr?

While I like the mission changes, fewer but but more valuable and tougher npcs, I think complex npcs are way too easy. The destroyers and bcs have such high sig radii that they are one volleyed and don't pose a threat at all--either give more npcs webbing and scrambling or ramp up the difficulty some other way.

That said, is the "big focus" on warfare in K2 mean we are going to see diminished returns on focus fire?

Exclamation


Hum set shields to give a brief moment of invulnerability after each time they are hit (say maybe 0.5 secs). Would boost shields and nerf focused fire. Would also encourage fewer, bigger, guns. Then again that might increase load to much...


Audri Fisher
Caldari
Burning Bush Enterprises
Posted - 2007.01.10 20:33:00 - [21]
 

Similar changes can be made with NPCs, such as reducing the number of NPCs and increasing their strengths, bounties, loot and salvage materials accordingly. To be honest I think we should do that regardless, as I often find it a tad silly that with a single ship I can warp to a complex and clean out something like 100 ships in total - in an assault ship.

I gotta say, if I spend 170 mil for an Assault ship + fittings, have excellent skills, I had better be able to wipe thefloor with a bunch of 6k rats that in small groups of 3-4 didn't pose that much of a threat to my noobie ibis once I figured out things like, how to fire my guns, and stopped using civie weapons.

The big problem, is that almost all assault ships are like ravens, they are an I win button at most pve, but have extremly high shortcommings in PvP.

Riley Craven
Caldari
Raata Invicti
Reckoning.
Posted - 2007.01.10 20:40:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Jim McGregor

Optimizations - very good!
Fixing blob - even better!
Changing npc numbers in missions - great!

Is this really a Tuxford blog? Because it makes me happy, not sad... Razz

Seriously, keep up the good work guys...sounds like you know what needs fixing. Smile



/me gets out flame thrower and starts tourching everything.

First. Blob warefare is not a bad thing. Alot of players like the epic feel of fleet battles. There should be no limits to fleets other than the ones already imposed by the new gang system. Even those at time are harsh given the training time.

Second, I dont really believe that CPP plays there own game. I played for a couple hours for a few days one revaltions deployed and succesfully predicted that rig prices were going to be on average about a 500-1bil for a rig.... right as usual.

Even with the increased drop rate of salvage it is still not enough, unless you want to pay over 30mil for a rig. Yes blah blah blah, rig prices are continuing to come down, but they will never be the tech 1 items that they should be or in large quantities. In fact if anything salvage needs to be boosted by no less than 4 times its current ammount if ccp wants to make them as common as say a t1 item on the market.

Further, the new exploration and COSMOS system is so ******edly hard that its dumb to attempt anything. Tux makes the point that skills are not deleted from your head, but when drug skills cost over 700mil a pop, few are going to be willing to spend that money. The player base is just too large to warrant such low drop rates. Tux made comments on a few bottle necks of production when it comes to booster when actually every step of the chain is a bottleneck. I predict in its current form, EVE will never see the light of day of a true booster production chain.

(PS. I help run production for one of the single largest t2 chains in EVE so I do have at least some knowledge of what I am talking about)

Ather Ialeas
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2007.01.10 20:41:00 - [23]
 

Anti-blob mechanisms...sorry but only limiting the amount of players in one place will do that and as we know, general public of EVE is against "battlefields" and specific "PvP arenas" since they're too much WoW-like even though they should basically be just deespace pockets without the ability to warp out. Also the current gang/fleet thing sucks hard, we(IRON) have tested several times on Tq that it's the cause of most of the lag we experience during our joyrides around the galaxy because it calculates the gang bonuses for every single member of the fleet every single session change. Seeing how CCP designed the fleet system I fail to see how you're going to optimize it since at its current state it really can't be optimized.

But yeah, it's your job to make it work, I'm here to play the game and whine occasionally about Amarr. Oh and if you decrease total amount of NPCs in spawn, I bet the following will happen:
1) Serpentis ratters get shafted since those bounties aren't that high and their total value relies entirely on the high amount of loot. Same applies to rogue drones; if you get 400m3 of alloys from one drone, what are you going to do?
2) Faction/officer spawns may get rarer if the total spawn rate is lowered in favor of balancing normal spawns.


In any case, it's nice to read stuff from CCP devs again.

woodman az
Gallente
United Space Aillance USA
Posted - 2007.01.10 21:25:00 - [24]
 

Just a though but shouldn't the focus be on fixing the current bugs instead of introducting new ones??

And wasn't there things promised that haven been delivered yet??

Like protraits...................

Sgt Napalm
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2007.01.10 23:30:00 - [25]
 

In on 1st page

"The harvesters can be destroyed, but you don't really need that many compared to the booster production it supplies, so the drop rate is a bit low. Both these items can be increased in drop frequency."

THANK YOU TUX!!!

I know time is always an issue but is this a fix that can be made via a patch or do we have to wait until Kali 2? kieron master?

Artmedis Valben
Gallente
Posted - 2007.01.11 04:43:00 - [26]
 

How I think salvage, Hacking and archeology should work.

Make it so that each ship has an x amount of salvage possible, say 10 rigs from a BS rat with 1mil bounty. Make it so that each unsuccessful cycle lowers the amount by 1 rig. So if you succeed on your 6th try with several salvagers and low skill you will retrieve 5 salvage parts. If you succeed on the first try with one salvager (high skill and salvage tackle for example) you retrieve all 10 components. This would make high skill an advantage over the salvage destroyer boat with 2 guns, 2 tractors and 4 salvagers, doing each wreck quickly with low skill and multiple modules.

Same with analyzer and decoder (have a small percentage of extra drop chance, i.e., special item, skillbook, interface BPC, modified with skill level that gets lower with each unsuccessful cycle.

Otherwise high skill and rigging of ships for professional advantage will not overcome this multi-module method of quick results, and you will mostly see salvaging done with an alt.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2007.01.11 05:48:00 - [27]
 

Quote:
As you might imagine, it is a bit hard to estimate the price of the rigs from drop rates.

Wrong, WRONG, WRONG !!!

It is *trivial* to determine the price of rigs based on drop rates using (relatively) simple mathematics and a bit of knowledge about how much ISK/hour people expect to earn if they are to DO something.

This was proven time and time again by the simple fact SEVERAL people (myself included) predicting the actual price of rigs with less than a 10% margin of error, long before they were actually released, and then again re-predicting the prices after the next wave of stealth (and not so stealth) drop rate adjustments.


Next time you decide to go economics on our asses, please, get a few volunteers from our ranks to help you out with it.
WE WOULD GLADLY TELL YOU HOW LARGE OR SMALL the drop rates SHOULD be for a CERTAIN price for a rig.

Prices are still insanely high for what I can only SUPPOSE the intended price range was (i.e. 2-5 mil per rig)
HINT: at the current stage of the game, drop rates and prices for rigs should have an almost constant product... that is, if you want to decrease rig prices ten-fold, increase drop rates ten-fold.
___

The actual problem is another: you pretty much forgot about the fact most rigs are useless on BC/BS, except a few.
And those few use only certain key components, which are insanely expensive compared to the other for that reason.

So, unless I got it all wrong (and rigs are NOT supposed to help the FRIGATE and T1 cruiser world), you still have a *20 drop rate increase ahead of you to make rigs cheap enough for their intended targets, so that all BC/BS users get their needed rigs and there's enough surplus that the prices can only NOT drop because of combat usage (i.e. ship destruction) on smaller sized vessels.

Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2007.01.11 07:47:00 - [28]
 

Edited by: Garia666 on 11/01/2007 07:45:33
Edited by: Garia666 on 11/01/2007 07:44:14
Everytime we hear about changes which should improve the speed of the game. and reduce lag.
but the facts are that the lag never goes away.
it gets a bit enoying over a period of time
new content keeps comming and with that new bugs.
mabe its an idea to make the game stable and as much lag free as possible.

Jumping in a gate waiting for 20 freaking minutes before you load and then to see your self back in your station is not my way of playing eve and having fun.

There has been massive hardware upgrades new code and still no improvement at all.
This game is advertized as alliance based warfare.. well to behonest thats not true on paper it is but the game play as hell isnt.

Jim McGregor
Posted - 2007.01.11 10:54:00 - [29]
 

Originally by: Riley Craven
Originally by: Jim McGregor

Optimizations - very good!
Fixing blob - even better!
Changing npc numbers in missions - great!

Is this really a Tuxford blog? Because it makes me happy, not sad... Razz

Seriously, keep up the good work guys...sounds like you know what needs fixing. Smile



/me gets out flame thrower and starts tourching everything.

First. Blob warefare is not a bad thing. Alot of players like the epic feel of fleet battles. There should be no limits to fleets other than the ones already imposed by the new gang system. Even those at time are harsh given the training time.



Im just quoting this part since the rest of what you said doesnt really have to do with what I wrote (even though a lot of if was good, im just not commenting on it. :)). But about the blog stuff...

I wrote some more about it in the other blog comments, but essentially I think that CCP should try to design the game to avoid the classical tank rush to win battles. It doesnt take a lot of player skill and it makes the game only about numbers and resources you can throw at something. But im definently no expert, and considering you are in BoB, I know you have tons more experience with this than I do. I would love to hear your comments about my tank rush example here... im sure you have played some RTS games and know what im talking about, and can see the similarities in Eve. Smile

Gamer4liff
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
Posted - 2007.01.11 13:20:00 - [30]
 

All I know is I sure hope you guys change lvl 4 couriers in kali 2 like you said you would.


Pages: [1] 2

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