open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked Trinity - is it holy? Live Dev Blog on Thursday, 13 December from 20:00 to 21:00 GMT
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Erotic Irony
Posted - 2007.12.12 06:00:00 - [31]

Documentation & eve wiki, when is it going to happen?

New POS mechanics happening?

Serra Minerva
Posted - 2007.12.12 06:12:00 - [32]

Why have the ships been rendered different colors? The Vindicator and Nighthawk as example. Both very black ships in regular content, yet in the premium content, they're no longer black.

Posted - 2007.12.12 06:25:00 - [33]

With ISK spamming on the increase in the channels and now Jita Local, when will trial accounts for once be banned like traders/players have asking for as long as I have been playing eve.

Posted - 2007.12.12 06:38:00 - [34]

You nerfed them. Fine! But just explain: How should we use them?

Feng Schui
Cruor Evertum Dominicus
Posted - 2007.12.12 06:54:00 - [35]

Q1) What does CCP see the primary role / style of the Pilgrim as? (ie: Solo, small gang, fleet support, etc..)

Q2) Why did the ECM-based ships receive an increase in module strength per level, and the other ewar-specialty ships did not (especially now that the modules have been nerfed).

Q3) Are there any intended fixes for the Pilgrim in the foreseeable future? If so, what changes is CCP looking at to fix / help this ship?

Q4) If changes are going to be made to the Pilgrim, when will we see those changes?

Q5) Has anyone at CCP read this thread?

Posted - 2007.12.12 07:03:00 - [36]

will the grafic options get enhanced for setting AA, AF HDR to get the fullout of 8800xxx ?

Heaven's Gate
Posted - 2007.12.12 07:10:00 - [37]

Why did you kill torps? They are one of the biggest missiles in the game surely they should be able to go the furthest???

Posted - 2007.12.12 07:22:00 - [38]

Hello, I have a question concerning the recent mineral compression adjustment coupled with it's impact on Carriers and Motherships.

Was the increase in volume from 1000m3 to 4000m3 intentional in fact it makes it difficult for Carriers and Motherships to function in the field now?

Carriers only have a 3250m3 cargo, and 10,000m3 Corporate Hangar Array(CHA) which means they can 't refit in space (modules must be dragged from cargo, and 4000m3 won't go into 3250m3 area) plus their CHA can't even carry a refit along with fuel.

Motherships are even worse for it, as my main's Mothership used to carry 4 cap remote armor repair and 4 cap remote shield transfer arrays, along with a few drone control units. That is at least 40,000m3 of my 50,000m3 CHA. Add in the fact a Mothership can't dock to refuel or refit, and that just leaves 8,000m3 of space for my fuel supply.

Is all of this intended? And should it be an error when can we expect a correction, because it is going to have a huge impact on capital ship campaigns away from home where POS modules and shield will need repairing and refitting is very much required.

Posted - 2007.12.12 07:54:00 - [39]

Is there any plan to reduce the amount of sociopathic suicide ganking in empire (for instance a anti cargo scanning module that makes it pot luck to take down a ship in empire) and if not will you guys ever bring out a way to insure the contents of a ship (for instance billion isk BPO's that you are moving so that if you do get taken down by a pschotic theiving ^$&^%$ you dont end up skint while the theiving #$%$% walks away laughing???)

Tapper Jackson
Posted - 2007.12.12 08:31:00 - [40]

Edited by: Tapper Jackson on 12/12/2007 08:31:07

Drones are vunerable to guns, missiles, other drones, smart bombs, webbers, etc. In short everything in EVE can touch them. They are the only weapon in EVE that can be destroyed, unlike guns, launchers and other modules. Drones take far longer to reach their target than missiles do and that's why missiles are generally considered a bad PvP investment. Drones have a greater signiture radius than their size would justify to allow a faster lock onto them. Trinity has downgraded some of the ships which specialize in drones by introducing bandwidth restrictions.

So here are my questions. With all that against drones why was it necessary to make them still more vulnerable by taking away the ability to charge their shields quickly by putting them in the drone bay? Is there a thought process at CCP which is leaning towards driving players away from drones? Perhaps the thought is to minimize the number of drones to take pressure off the servers or something? Is this all part of the desire to limit the ability of Carriers?

If you're going to continue to nerf drones and the ships which carry them in the future, why not just eliminate drones alltogether and give the pilots who've trained in drones a refund on their skill points so that they can be invested in guns and missiles? You'd achieve your apparent goal and stop frustrating and angering a lot of people.

Best regards,
Tapper Jackson

Happy hOur Mining and industry
Posted - 2007.12.12 09:38:00 - [41]

Edited by: Pivalak on 12/12/2007 14:12:15
Edited after the recent statement by CCP on the "boot.ini" issue

1) Will CCP stick to the EULA, which theoretically frees the company for any responsibility on the damages caused by its software, regarding the issue which caused a high number of computers not to boot after applying the patch?

2) Are you considering any kind of compensation to players for the disturbances caused, and the loss of time and even data in some cases?

The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
Posted - 2007.12.12 09:50:00 - [42]

Originally by: Traska Gannel
"Regarding the changes to the volume of some modules. Overall the changes would appear to be inconsistently applied and generally unrelated to the mineral requirements for the modules. Could you explain the reasoning behind these changes and whether they are operating as intended? The changes have far reaching impact on many players (mission runners and ratters among others - anyone who loots) and not just on those shipping minerals from empire to 0.0 compressed into modules.

Some examples of the seeming inconsistencies (and there are many others):
M size Heavy Beam Laser I - 100m3 - requires about 1/5 of the minerals of
L size Dual Heavy Beam Laser I - 50m3

Remote Sensor Booster I - 100m3 - requires about the same minerals as
Sensor Booster I - 5m3

Small Hull Repairer I - 50m3
Medium Hull Repairer I - 10m3
Large Hull Repairer I - 50m3

Prisoners - 7.5m3 - I have no idea why the volume of prisoners would have changed at all"

I'd like an answer to this issue as well.

James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2007.12.12 10:02:00 - [43]

"Would it be possible to have 4 more powergrid on the Crane, so it can fit a MWD like all the rest of the blockade runners?"

"How do you decide what a new ship 'should be like'? What factors affect the design choices involved in e.g. the new jumpfreighters?"

"Did you lose your boot.ini?"

Prophets of Doom
Posted - 2007.12.12 10:07:00 - [44]

Q1. A major focus of the balance changes was to make 0.0 logistics more difficult in the short/medium term. Given the experience of the last week would CCP consider a simpler solution to this perceived problem of easy logistics by reversing the loading restrictions and module size changes and instead increase the assembled size of haulers so they cannot fit in carriers or otherwise prevent their use?

Q2. Given interdictor classes all have different operational speeds please can you explain why all four had a blanket 25% speed reduction applied?

Q3. @ Zulupark - please do not take this personnally, it really is not intended that way - do you believe you know enough about the game to use your powers for the long term improvement of the game safely? Some of your statements have filled many of us with feelings from bafflement to horror such as "carriers are solopwn mobiles" [paraphased] or "a ship that can drop a bubble should have some disadvantages ... a no brainer surely". The target of a solo carrier will surely just fly away before its locked and dictors have the sig radius of a small moon, t1 resists and low hits. Sorry if this seems harsh :/



Posted - 2007.12.12 10:16:00 - [45]

My question:

When is amarr getting its oomph

and can you give us ANY detail on what this might lean towards?

Winters Chill
Ministry of War
Posted - 2007.12.12 10:49:00 - [46]

What is the main design descision behind the apparent continued nerfing of amarr ships; alot of people are confused by the fact that the Amarr suffer so many more disadvantages in the first 0-5 months of play than the other races. Could you explain why For example:- no "noob" astrometrics frigate, no efficient mining cruiser (yes we have the arbitrator which is a drone boat but all the other nations mining cruiser easily out mine it), only 2 predictable damage types, ships bonuses that exist to make our weapons work not to make them better.

Righteous Deeds
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:03:00 - [47]

1. Why is nerfing/buffing used to "balance" the game at all, rather than simply, slowly introducing new technologies? Wouldn't a practice of slowly evolving the game cause far less player frustration than effectively changing the rulebook mid-game?

2. Will any of the changes introduced in Trinity that dramatically altered the game mechanics, be eliminated or reduced, sooner rather than later? If so, which ones are being considered?


Corporati Capitalis
Tollan Technologies
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:13:00 - [48]

Can we get some hard figures on invention success chance? Specifically, what was changed for ships smaller than battleships, but also the general success chance formula. ALL other industries in game are more or less exact science, thus allowing players to make an informed decision on what, when and how to build/research/etc.

Can we inventors get the same treatment please? Embarassed

Katini Ellegahn
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:17:00 - [49]

Originally by: Traska Gannel
"Regarding the changes to the volume of some modules. Overall the changes would appear to be inconsistently applied and generally unrelated to the mineral requirements for the modules. Could you explain the reasoning behind these changes and whether they are operating as intended? The changes have far reaching impact on many players (mission runners and ratters among others - anyone who loots) and not just on those shipping minerals from empire to 0.0 compressed into modules.

Some examples of the seeming inconsistencies (and there are many others):
M size Heavy Beam Laser I - 100m3 - requires about 1/5 of the minerals of
L size Dual Heavy Beam Laser I - 50m3

Remote Sensor Booster I - 100m3 - requires about the same minerals as
Sensor Booster I - 5m3

Small Hull Repairer I - 50m3
Medium Hull Repairer I - 10m3
Large Hull Repairer I - 50m3

Prisoners - 7.5m3 - I have no idea why the volume of prisoners would have changed at all"

I'd like this one answered.

Aperture Science Enrichment Center
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:18:00 - [50]

Will Domination spawns ever stop dropping T1 unnamed Ballistic Control Systems and Shield Boost Amplifiers and have their faction item drop rate brought into line with other factions ? And if this is as designed (which my filtered bug report seems to indicate) why was it designed as such ?

Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:21:00 - [51]

1. "What are the plans to improve bounty hunting and smuggling"?

2. "Can we get the pilgrim fixed?"


Yohanes Flame
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:21:00 - [52]

Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 12/12/2007 11:22:30
Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 12/12/2007 11:22:03
Edited by: Yohanes Flame on 12/12/2007 11:21:45
Is there a system in place to approve/censor the statements of GM's on the forums? I rather have educated and COMPLETELY accurate information every time than a personal relationship with the GM's.

Why did the introduction of the combat log, whose sole intent whose sole purpose was to track kills for all involved parties, not achieve it's sole purpose.

How will this patch be studied? Will the lessons learned for this "patch" be published or internal only?

How will the intent of "game balancing" be communicated to the community in the future, because I assume the way it was for this "patch" did not work as intended. Patch notes are obviously not published in a scope comparable to the implemented changes.

Will CCP be promising the community, or starting a new "Project", a 50% reduction in the known issues list within a set time frame. WITH PUBLISHED NOTIFICATION OF FIXES IN THEIR ENTIRE SCOPE. What I mean by this is not "Bug 47892 - fixed." With the wide spread modification of the playing environment I along with many others felt greatly broad sided be the resent "patch."

Can you explain this please?


The list below is the current list of known issues as of 6th December 2007.
Build 45017

170+ known issues.


I have personally stopped reporting bugs or petitions for the game all together.

Erotic Irony
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:34:00 - [53]

this thread is now about feature requests and players feeling marginalized,

Ormen Tuttle
Merchant Mining and Manufacturing
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:35:00 - [54]

I'm an avid mission runner. The patch notes mentioned 100s of new missions, but thus far I haven't encountered one. Did the new missions make it into Trinity?

Thank you!

School of Applied Knowledge
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:37:00 - [55]

Arrow when CCP will stop cheat pilot's?
Arrow when CCP will stop increase more skill's instead to look over the shoulder what already have been done and do real balancing...
Arrow why NPC cheated and keep cheat us with CCP in a head? (mwd, un-range torpedos, etc)
Arrow To collect in a box the couple of matches disappointed on the floor, is it necessary for this purpose to shake out matchesbox? Did you read some time, how many time the developers of other off-line games require to do one or another game? Mentioned off-line, cause on-line is more difficulty... Look how many in there: characters, weapons and other... Now back in EVE, who CCP think they are, God's - to do for so short time so much a lot of innovations?
Arrow do CCP realize, what many old pilot's feeling as a fool's with new patches, nerf's and skill's? Way of CCP is not now like "cut his head, and forget"? Do you have in CCP department the person who look after balancing of greedy of CCP?
Arrow do CCP know the space itself not a supermarket or car saloon where everything have to be shining? Spase is a uncomfortable, ugly, dangerous and horrable thing... There have no place for the ships looks like X-mas tree... Do CCP know, what many pilots don't even use sound during game? Why CCP spent time and money of subscribers for content (read Premium) wich was not that important at novadays?
YARRRR!! Cause of those my personal feelings over the year I stoped to advertising EvE, now count how much you lost to compare with previous years when I attracted over 10 subscibers? I believe I'm not alone who did this.

Question Last question - Do DEV's read the thread's anymore?

p.s. I didnt mention those question's other peoples already asked about topredo's, new volume of module's, drone's, etc wich you ****ed up with last patch?

Times of Ancar
Posted - 2007.12.12 11:57:00 - [56]

Edited by: Helison on 12/12/2007 12:05:13
Edited by: Helison on 12/12/2007 12:01:35
1. Carrier balance:
1.a. Can you give any details of your plans for carriers in the future? If this will be posted as Devblog itīs also fine for me.
1.b. Why did you nerf cargobays of all loaded ships? A much more easier solution would have been to increase the volume of industrials. At the moment it is still possible to use carriers for moving compressed minerals (in form of ammunition), but you canīt store ships, which have loot in them.
1.c. Is there any chance to increase the base cargo bay of carriers to above 4000m3 (volume of capital modules) and increase the corp hangar bay to 20.000 m3? This will NOT make them useable as haulers, but will make them a bit more useable again after module nerf.

2. Moon materials: Please check the current prices for dysprosium and promethium and their products. It seems like you need to change something. We have a massive shortage at the moment.

3. What are your ideas on breaking up the market-hub Jita? Itīs getting more and more difficult to buy stuff in other regions. There is the idea of increased taxes in extreme market hubs, why donīt you implement it?

PS: Please provide a transcript for this LiveDevBlog!!!

Joss Sparq
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2007.12.12 12:01:00 - [57]

Question 1) Under the "Exploits or exploitable changes" section of EVE: Trinity Changes and Fixes it has been stated "The Caldari Navy has ceased offering their FoF missiles to capsuleers.". For what reason was this change implemented, what justification can you provide?

Obviously I'm asking for something more detailed than "The Caldari Navy, etc.".

Supplementary: why were these missiles removed or are otherwise still unavailable on Market search and also currently unavailable under Item Search (Exact) of Contracts. Was this intended or accidental?

Question 2) Please mind the wall of text, but it serves to explain the basis of the question:

According to information published in Attribute reassignment modifier scripts and bandwidth, this dev blog states that "As a general rule, the Gallente drone ships are biased towards firepower at the expense of spare drones.".

It appears that an example of the exception to this rule is the Ishkur, which was previously capable of a total drone bay size of 40m due to it having an initial drone bay size of 15m, which would expand up to a total of 40m with Assault Ships level 5 trained.

This allowed it to field four medium combat drones, which one expects would provide significantly more firepower than the new limit imposed by 25mb of "bandwidth" and so better suits the role of the ship than this new limited version does. Therefore it appears that if anything, the firepower of the Ishkur has been reduced and this is in fact completely opposite to the stated intentions of the dev blog for Gallente, let alone being just an exception to any rule.

One could argue that the previous conditions rewarded a well trained player and the new system only serves to gratify all new pilots with an immediate 25m of drone bay without attention to their skills - immediately penalizing all the pilots who've invested time into training in order only to provide a small and very short term immediate benefit for new pilots.

Can the tactical advantage of more drones/types being available clearly overcome the loss of brute firepower which can be fielded - I don't think it can. Were a choice between the two still available, then perhaps it could, but this only serves to cement a new tactic set in place of another and there has consequently been a failure to consider the outcome compared to the objectives.

The question I put forward to you, is why should a player train for, purchase and fly (for example) the Ishkur when it would most likely be quicker and cheaper (both time and ISK) to aim instead towards piloting a Tech 1 Cruiser (The Vexor) while gaining increased firepower and flexibility of fittings?

Supplementary: Do you genuinely believe the Ishkur still fulfills the original role it was created for since these changes and if so, how?

Because on the surface, the situation you have since created makes it look like the Ishkur is now a very poor choice indeed as you've brutally lobotomized the principal mechanism of specialization upon which it was designed and fielded.

Tlar Sanqua
Gallente Defence Initiative
Posted - 2007.12.12 12:04:00 - [58]

1) Why did the gallente ships all get that pale blue stripping on them? The trailers had to show Gallente ships in the dark to make them look attractive and it appears to me that this is definite twisting of the truth so to speak.

2) following up on that, will any of the models in trinity be re-examined?

3) Which of the new features are you most proud of in the new expansion?

Dr Slaughter
Coreli Corporation
Posted - 2007.12.12 12:26:00 - [59]

1) What's your favorite UnitTest framework? Very Happy
2) Is having multiple clients causing you all to live in'interesting times' or have you found it pretty straight forward to manage so far

Admiral Nova
Strike Team Nova
Posted - 2007.12.12 12:28:00 - [60]


Is it intentional that the maximum BPC that can be made for a jump freighter is 1 run, regardless of the decrpytor.

This is the only ship that will invent a single run regardless of the decryptor. Simple yes or no will do (from a qualified person).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only