open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The Great Deep Safe Nerf of 2010
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... : last (28)

Author Topic

Pellit1
Caldari
Fatality.
Posted - 2010.04.13 14:55:00 - [391]
 

Originally by: Elzon1
Edited by: Elzon1 on 13/04/2010 14:46:09
Remeber everyone... this is all due to a bug. In no way is this a game mechanic, it is an exploit. All the exploit users should be happy CCP is giving them some time to recover their assets. They could have just banned those who had such bookmarks.

It was nice of them to give you a warning, wasn't it? Very Happy

Edit: spelling Laughing


If CCP can 'time honour' the exploit with putting cans in your cargohold to increase your cargo, I don't see why they can't do the same with DSPs.

Vladstorm
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:00:00 - [392]
 

maybe this was suggested before:

instead of this nerf, why not add a new probe type, a 1000 au probe or something along that range. or buff deep space probes. and make your space 'limit' something astronomical, not a mere 10au.

Swiftgaze
Elysium Trading Company
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:06:00 - [393]
 

Ahhhh Eve is earning more and more authenticity.

"Sir, we can't warp there."
- .. why not?
"It's more than 10 AU away from the celestial body that's the farthest away from the sun."
- So?
"Sir, we can't warp there."
- .......ok let's just put up a few reactors on our high sec poses then, alright?
"Sir.."

Myz Toyou
the Organ Grinder and Company
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:12:00 - [394]
 

Originally by: Dan Sun
So what happend to the Sandbox?


http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/ur/8q/build-proof-sand-box-kids-200X200.jpg

Image changed to link. Navigator

DOARota
Gallente
BURN EDEN
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:12:00 - [395]
 

At the very least you(CCP) should offer a valid reason for doing this. The have/have not explanation holds no water since new players can make deep safe spots just as easily as any veteran.

Lrrp
Minmatar
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:19:00 - [396]
 

Originally by: DOARota
At the very least you(CCP) should offer a valid reason for doing this. The have/have not explanation holds no water since new players can make deep safe spots just as easily as any veteran.


Exactly. Why now? Are deep safes somehow impacting the lag issue or is this just another way to **** off a lot of people? Just who was complaining about this anyways?
Fix the lag issue first before you eliminate work arounds that people came up with.

Kuseka Adama
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:19:00 - [397]
 

Quote:
Also lol @ all those players who depended on those deep safes to play the game.


Its very simple now: You need 1500 players to hold a system and prevent the enemy from entering to fight. Systems with this would now be basically invulnerable to harm. And there are more than a few places in EVE in zero sec this happens. This basically allows turtling which SUCKS.

Quote:
The strategic consequences, at first glance, are that if you're willing to tie up 500+ players 24/7, you can make a system close to invulnerable. However, though the castle is invulnerable, the Huns can pillage the countryside with impunity -- and if you leave the castle to chase them, they can now risk cynoing in a blob, which means they're on the inside of the castle looking out, and you're on the outside looking in.


Ding ding ding! We have a winner. This is what i'm afraid of the most. The mega alliances out there (IT, Atlas, NC, etc) have the membership to do this on multiple fronts in multiple systems thereby preventing key objects from ever falling under attack.

I don't bother using these. But it sure as hell makes me glad i got cloaking 4 yesterday. I might put it to five after this change. This is a bad idea without more experimentation. I can understand getting rid of some of the crazier deeper safes. But i can not agree with the heavy handed damned if you do dead if you don't method they want to implement this. Motherships and Titans can not dock in stations. Its that simple. Stations do not have that capacity and by reckoning never will. The counter to this may well be coming in Tyrannis With all this planetary exploration stuff it may be possible that a true 'spacedock' system could actually be implemented in planetary orbit (I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WILL EXIST OR NOT) But a system to finally allow pilots of these massive ships to be able to live in at least a modicum of safety would be overdue. Otherwise the last two dev blogs have made supercapitals completely worthless to own. No matter your alliance size. I stated in the insurance dev blog that CCP was pricing anyone under 1000 players out of the supercapital game. Now they may be putting even the larger groups out of it as well. These ships would now demand their pilot be actively piloting that ship 23/7 to prevent their destruction. No person can maintain that pace.

CCP News like this would be far easier to swallow if you were implementing a system that would allow those two ship types to dock. These changes to me suggest this HAS to be coming because i can not believe you want to remove these ships completely from the game. Which is what your intentions appear to be based off these two dev blogs. So either your telling me, that supercapitals are bad for the game and are going to be made unplayable. Or your telling me that we're going to throw you a bone but your not going to know about it until launch. The latter is a bad thing the first isnt so much but annoying none the less.

Tarhim
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:19:00 - [398]
 

Originally by: DOARota
The have/have not explanation holds no water since new players can make deep safe spots just as easily as any veteran.


*sigh* But they will not be able to after Tyrannis deployment, because CCP is fixing e-warp exploit that made them possible.

Sunbird Huy
Caldari
WEPRA CORP
White Noise.
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:24:00 - [399]
 

Originally by: CCP Lemur
Dear players, the blog was published after I left the office and I just finished reading through all 11 pages.

This man posted a picture explaining all of the "but what with spots between two celestials?" concerns.

More changes are in discussion right now and I'll let you know as soon as we reached a decision.


1. Is that man getting a reward for doing your job, PROPERLY?
2. "I'll let you know..." Just as you(CCP) did in the OP? What do you need to discuss about is what I/all of us fail to understand. Don't be a ostrych with the head stuck deep into the sandy hole, with your butt sticking out and browning your customers.

You are being rude, arrogant and nonchallant about your customers. You are being disrispectfull to every single player that has ever paid a subscription fee. At least treat us with something less than sheer sarcastic disrespect that causes nothing but antagonism.

Don't SHAITE in YOUR OWN BREADBASKET.

Jenina Hawke
Minmatar
Dromedary Goat Albatross and Fish
Big Bang Quantum
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:27:00 - [400]
 

Originally by: Oasio

-Are you really absolutely definitively sure that missions/explorations site cannot spawn outside the 10 AU limits ? Especially in very small systems ?



Of course they can and already do. I have the bookmarks to prove it.

eleve
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:27:00 - [401]
 

Had to check two times that this devblog really was posted 12.4.2010, not 1.4.2010.

Eventhought I'm not using deepsafes much, this bothers me. We are finally getting these annoying invisible walls to this game too. It's just stupid. Destroying ships and stuff makes this just even more ridiclous.

If you really are going to implent this, that 10AU range is way too short. Why we have deepspace probes? I have probed couple guys 77AU away from closest celestial and it didn't take too much time (about 5 minutes). And I used only combat scanner probes.

DOARota
Gallente
BURN EDEN
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:30:00 - [402]
 

Originally by: Tarhim
Originally by: DOARota
The have/have not explanation holds no water since new players can make deep safe spots just as easily as any veteran.


*sigh* But they will not be able to after Tyrannis deployment, because CCP is fixing e-warp exploit that made them possible.

They gave the have/have not as a causal factor for making the change. It does not exist, so after the patch arguments are moot. They could make deep safes now as we type this, thus eliminating that argument.

As far as fixing the e-warp , you will still be able to do the double logofski to avoid being tackled so fixed might be a fairly strong assessment.

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:31:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Gypsio III
Did you not think, even for a second, that that sort of clear, concise explanation should have been in the devblog?


I think it was perfectly clear if you actually read the blog instead of skimming it. I understood exactly what was meant the first time I read that sentence.

It's not CCP's fault if you can't understand a fairly simple sentence.

Rico Lobo
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:34:00 - [404]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Why the bloody hell DESTROY ships out in deep safes ?
What about people that are in ships there now, and their accounts are inactive, and they only come back AFTER the patch ?
WHY NOT SIMPLY MOVE ALL THOSE SHIPS INWARD INSTEAD ?
Just dump'em in a random spot inside the system far from anything else instead of deleting them.

No, I don't know anybody in this potential situation personally, but it's completely screwed up to just announce such a mass deletion barely a month before it'll happen.
And a lot of people don't even read devblogs.

FOR SHIPS, MOVE INSTEAD OF DELETE.
Dammit !

NO DELETE DELETE DELETE! Stuf going KABOOM in massive quantities means more sales of replacment kits!

Akita you know what the worst bit is? Because I have lines tied up producing subs I now have less than a month to start rolling out new ships! hell all that stuff going BOOM at the sametime and I have my lines tied up with other crap!(WHINES)

/sarcasm off

I have to agree with Akita 100% on this one, ****in stupid move guys. you just decided to abritraily punish people for your screwup. (and yes, I agree deepsafespots need to go.

the 10 AU limmit could have been done a long time ago.

Dr Cron
Northern Lights Number 5
Hydroponic Zone
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:34:00 - [405]
 

CCP proves yet again that they dont actually play the game.

xThugx
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:39:00 - [406]
 

Make it so you can warp to probes.
Improve deep space scan probes.
Fix problems when a system is blobbed.

Ziley
The Ankou
Raiden.
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:39:00 - [407]
 

This is plain dumb. Listen to your customers and focus ALL available resources on restoring pre-dominion fleet lag levels. Don't waste your time on changes like these...

Quit imitating Blizzard and HTFU!

Ur kahanu
hirr
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:40:00 - [408]
 

Originally by: DOARota
At the very least you(CCP) should offer a valid reason for doing this. The have/have not explanation holds no water since new players can make deep safe spots just as easily as any veteran.


SIGNED!!!!

Rico Lobo
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:44:00 - [409]
 

Originally by: CCP Lemur
Dear players, the blog was published after I left the office and I just finished reading through all 11 pages.

More changes are in discussion right now and I'll let you know as soon as we reached a decision.
Good because I hope you get the Irony of the people who stand the most to gain from this (industrialist like me Akta and so on) including some who agree that deleting the deepspace safe spots is a good idea (me) think that also defacto deleting the stashes and ships is a bad ias bad an Idea as reintroducing thoes old bugs


Griznatle
Caldari
Heretic Army
B A N E
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:44:00 - [410]
 

Hey CCP, does that mean your removing t2 bpo's? Cause I wasnt subscribing when you put those on market.
I know Iceland doesnt have many troops fighting over-seas, but unless you want your island taken over by drunken American vets wanting their stuff back, you better re-think your "ideas".

If you put all of CCP in a room, will they write a novel? I know monkeys can.
But calling CCP primates would be calling monkeys mindless vagina's.
Thats a scientific term.

Tarhim
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.13 15:50:00 - [411]
 

Originally by: DOARota

*sigh* But they will not be able to after Tyrannis deployment, because CCP is fixing e-warp exploit that made them possible.

They gave the have/have not as a causal factor for making the change. It does not exist, so after the patch arguments are moot. They could make deep safes now as we type this, thus eliminating that argument.



Yes, because they are (gasp!) ANTICIPATING. Yes, anyone can make deep safes NOW. No, they will not be able to after Tyrannis, so there will be another thing for newer whiners to constantly complain about, after T2 BPOs.

Oh, and while deleting stuff outside "system border" is very on the HTFU line, it is very very very bad idea. Just move it closer or to random spot, ffs. At least piloted ships.

Quote:

As far as fixing the e-warp , you will still be able to do the double logofski to avoid being tackled so fixed might be a fairly strong assessment.


We'll see how it turns out in release. Anyway, DSS-making e-warp is "fixed" already.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:06:00 - [412]
 

Edited by: Kerfira on 13/04/2010 16:09:43
The real reason for this change could be that the database is starting to suffer from what was previously known as 'insta-bookmark-disease'...

Might not be that they WANT to do this, but that they HAVE to....

Also, the emphasis on destroying everything outside the 10au range... Is there anyone who is aware whether wast amounts of ships and cans are being left there as replenishment for war losses?
If so this could explain a bit more about the reasons.

Narfas Deteis
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:12:00 - [413]
 

http://szafran.civ.pl/eve/tyrannis01.jpg

Image changed to link. Navigator

Zex Maxwell
Caldari
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:13:00 - [414]
 

Originally by: Seth Ruin
So Deep Space Scanner Probes are now completely useless?


Yeah that's what I was thinking. when I read this. CCP, If your doing this for the deep space reasons, you just removed an Item in the game. DSSPs (Deep space scanner probe) have an AU of 265 ish range (I don't know the exact number and I cant look it up atm). Deleting everything past an 10 AU range of a planet will render this item useless.

CCP, Under the current scanner probe system, most stuff that is scanable is near a 12 to 25 AU range, and can be easily picked up with normal probes. DSSPs is not a practical probe to use since we can center the probes on a planet and scan. we do more scanning but its easier to do more scanning then scan with a big probe, then switch to a smaller probe.

DSSPs is for scanning down DEEP space of a about to 100AU of range. What we normally look for with DSSPs is for other people, since there is no anomaly to scan for out side the system.

CCP this is what I propose. Destroy everything that is out side the range of the DSSPs, doing so will still keep the use of DSSPs.

Axhind
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:16:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: CCP Lemur
Dear players, the blog was published after I left the office and I just finished reading through all 11 pages.

This man posted a picture explaining all of the "but what with spots between two celestials?" concerns.

More changes are in discussion right now and I'll let you know as soon as we reached a decision.


That still ignores that deep safes are only way of having a chance of jumping in to system where the defenders are without getting in to a turkey shoot. Why not fix the game before fixing insignificant problems. Not to mention if you care about new vs. old player remove the T2 BPOs as that is by far the most unbalancing thing in eve ATM.

XoPhyte
Black Nova Corp
IT Alliance
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:20:00 - [416]
 

Originally by: CCP Lemur
Dear players, the blog was published after I left the office and I just finished reading through all 11 pages.

This man posted a picture explaining all of the "but what with spots between two celestials?" concerns.

More changes are in discussion right now and I'll let you know as soon as we reached a decision.


After reading 11 pages you must have missed the important parts. Let me summarize them for you...

  1. Concerns about mid safes > 10au from a celestial object not working : These will work just fine as the player illustration indicates.
  2. Concerns around laggy grid loading on titan bridges and not having sufficient time to load the grid properly before the hostile fleet is on top of them and killing them : Legitimate concern
  3. Concerns about SuperCap pilots who had no other option except to log off at a deepsafe if they found themselves away from the game for an extended period of time (loss of job, military duty, moving house etc.), and will come back to a pod?? : Legitimate concern
  4. Concerns that CCP is focused on non-critical issues and continue to "add content" to a broken game. The overall fundamentals of the game are not working properly, players get frustrated when CCP works to remove or modify non-critical items (especially those used to help alleviate the broken conditions) : Legitimate concern



When you cannot jump through a gate, or engage a hostile in a PVP game, the fundamentals are simply broken. Players for the last several years have been giving CCP a very clear message, "We do not care about content or changes to the game as long as the issues surrounding lag exist". Yes we realize you are working on the lag issue, but honestly, until you focus on lag and nothing but lag, we don't want to hear about mining planets, removing deepsafe bookmarks, insurance changes etc. until you...

  1. Fix the existing lag issue
  2. Change your testing procedures to insure that the lag does not simply reappear during the next update as it always does.



"New Content" to your player base is a lag free (as much as possible), working game.

One more bit of feedback for you CCP. Everytime I talk to a friend that plays MMO's about Eve, they always say the same thing regarding Eve... "I have heard that you die to invisible enemies and there is nothing you can do about it". My reply is always, "Yeah, it sucks".

Cordin Hamir
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:21:00 - [417]
 

Fair enough but what about that other technique for staying safe forever in a system i.e. get to a safe, cloak and then stay there forever?

ElanMorin6
Garoun Investment Bank
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:22:00 - [418]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 13/04/2010 16:09:43
The real reason for this change could be that the database is starting to suffer from what was previously known as 'insta-bookmark-disease'...

Might not be that they WANT to do this, but that they HAVE to....



I don't think you remember just how many instas people needed back in the bad old days. There's no comparison.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:29:00 - [419]
 

Edited by: Kerfira on 13/04/2010 16:31:05
Originally by: ElanMorin6
Originally by: Kerfira
The real reason for this change could be that the database is starting to suffer from what was previously known as 'insta-bookmark-disease'...

Might not be that they WANT to do this, but that they HAVE to....

I don't think you remember just how many instas people needed back in the bad old days. There's no comparison.

Oh, I do remember! I had most of the regions, high-sec included... That's why I said 'starting' to suffer!

IIRC, back then, the instas you had for a system were loaded from the database when you jumped into system. This could(!) mean that the database load for a fleet jumping in is significantly increased if a lot of people have them.

Since we don't have any numbers or other indications, I'm just speculating... primarily because it seems to be such a small matter to work on that there almost have to be untold reasons...

OmegaTwig
Firebird Squadron
Terra-Incognita
Posted - 2010.04.13 16:33:00 - [420]
 

TLDR: Dont do it its a bad idea and many people would ragequit EvE all together.

I can see why you guys would want to make a change to eliminate deep safes however, its a sandbox game. You should be allowed to do whatever you want including being able to take the time to get yourself into a "Deep Safe."

Many people store their Titans, SC's, and other EXTREMELY valuable assets that, by virtue of your game mechanics, can not dock in a station and CAN be bumped outside of a POS shield. (Yes i know its space and know how physics works in space, but if you cant bump a POS then why the hell can you bump a Titan with at least 100 times more mass than a POS?)

Removing everyone's assets from their deep safes would be a huge blow to the eve economy and the players in the game.

ExclamationPossible Solution:Exclamation
Allow people to "Anchor" their supercaps TO a POS (like tying a horse to a tree or w/e) so that they CAN NOT be bumped outside of a POS shield. (Put like a 30 min anchor/unanchor timer on it where the supercap CAN NOT do ANYTHING during that time, including movement, and if the supercap IS NOT ANCHORED then they CAN be bumped outside of the shield like "normal")

If you do allow this then I am sure that many people would be O.K. with the inability to create new deep safe spots and the inability to warp to the ones that have already been created.

Also I would post a notice on the Log-In page or make a Popup notification for the first time you log into the game with the details on this change...

I think that the current "fix" you have now is flawed and would cause more harm than good it would do...


Pages: first : previous : ... 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 ... : last (28)

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