Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Midori Blacke
Amarr Loot.
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 10:43:00 -
[61]
Any news about "Socket Closed" error, especially second subtype when client gets disconnected after being idle for some time?
|
Lors Dornick
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 11:18:00 -
[62]
Originally by: DRACO selen
We'll have some time to read them on Wednesday anyways, so feel free to tell us the story
Yeah, we can read the story during the extended DT, then we'll have plenty of time bickering about it in the forums during the over-extended DT and some more time during the panic reboot later that evening.
All as per well established EVE standards
|
Emerald Cortess
Caldari tr0pa de elite Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2009.09.07 11:23:00 -
[63]
Originally by: Dorian Gozzie
Originally by: Miza Eshkel no one gives a **** about this ****, fix the damn scanner, 45 pages of people telling how stupid you are is not enough ? ****ing ******s
Originally by: Emerald Cortess FFS CCP, sort ur ****ing lives out! Rollback that most annoying scanner change! Get a clue ... look in Assembly Hall: It's the longest issue-thread since disabling ghost-training and u don't give a ****?
There was not enough lag before to sanction this nerf to small-scale-pvp.
Hey, how about you guys quit ****ing and moaning? If it hasn't been changed yet, then there is probably a reason why CCP won't do it. Whether or not this is the case, if you don't like it, then cancel your accounts and go play WOW.
No need to play WOW. 2-second delay turned eve into it already.
And besides: If no one keeps on moaning, they probably would care even less. Like what if noone would post suggestions on Assembly Hall ... well, CCP would have to play their game themselves to find out what they have to change.
|
Ihavewindage
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 02:33:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Midori Blacke Any news about "Socket Closed" error, especially second subtype when client gets disconnected after being idle for some time?
There are about 38 pages of requests on how to fix this issue, but nothing ever discussed. I guess this is another one of those bugs the devs just hope that if they ignore it long enough, people will forget about getting disconnected every 3 mins.
|
PJRiddick
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 12:51:00 -
[65]
CCP, actually the bug with the no hit at ZERO was a good thing, Heres why. Most of the pirates use blasters, and of course blasters are close range weapons. Most of the pirates jsut "APROACH" there victoms with there guns a blazing and tear there victoms up, this is something that you all know by now. Myself, im not a pirate nor do i go greafing people, The "NOHIT" at ZERO only gives the target a chance to survive a bit while the aggressor approaches but gets too close to his target shooting OVER his target. ON THE OTHER HAND,..... The HIT AT ZERO rule can work both ways, there has been several times that i have been aggressed AT ZERO and havetn been able to hit a damn thing, this just might the thing to help out the VICTOM a bit especially when he is in his mission ship. A couple good vollies at ZERO very well could turn the tide of a battle. This subject could very well go both ways. -=+>xXx<+=- Fly safe and remember no one is a ZERO in eve, atleast not in eve anymore
|
Cuchulain Spartan
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 13:05:00 -
[66]
Wohooo, deysnc being fixed.
I can be good for a week then get 15 in 1 night. Lost many a ship and drones to this and petitions don't qualify for a reimbursement according to CCP rules as the deysnc isn't shown as a server side issue (even though I have log server files,)
Anyway, hope it's fixed for good |
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 14:46:00 -
[67]
Good stuff all around. Very happy that the 0m tracking issue has finally been fixed. Less desync and nod crashing makes Eve a better world for all of us. Correct market calculations is also a huge win. Thank you, CCP Devs. <3 <3 <3
Not sure why people are complaining so much about the two second interval on the directional scanner. Yes, I use the directional to hunt down targets myself, and honestly, it isn't that big a deal. Considering it was done to help server-side issues and possible exploits, this very minor invonvencience is a tiny price to pay.
|
Night Doc
Scoopex Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 15:07:00 -
[68]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford short note on the tracking formula.
There are basically two distances that are used in the calculations.
distance which is the distance from the center of the balls which is used for the tracking bit of the formula short distance which is the distance from the edge of the ball which is used for falloff.
This isn't new or introduced with this fix but maybe important to note nonetheless. What was the bug is that we were checking for a zero value in the short distance instead of the distance.
Could you describe in more detail the implications of this change?... so far... this means?:
- all distances are now more accurate? - all formulas (lot of them) containing distance will behave different? - ACs have been nerfed due to the bigger value the distance is? - Target painters have been fixed and now they do affect ammo dps? - etc
please, tell us if this is a big change that affects many formulas?
thanks
- Target analysis - Fit EVE to screen - EFT setup sort |
Ariane VoxDei
|
Posted - 2009.09.08 19:10:00 -
[69]
Which is the real deployment date?
This thread says thursday 10th.
The Eve online front page says wednesday 9th. www.eveonline.com
|
xHP SAUCEx
Amarr 24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 06:18:00 -
[70]
friday 10th 08.00-18.00 thats the real deployment time including the time it takes them to fix the game when they screw it up and everyone disconnects repeatedly
|
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 08:50:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Night Doc
Originally by: CCP Tuxford short note on the tracking formula.
There are basically two distances that are used in the calculations.
distance which is the distance from the center of the balls which is used for the tracking bit of the formula short distance which is the distance from the edge of the ball which is used for falloff.
This isn't new or introduced with this fix but maybe important to note nonetheless. What was the bug is that we were checking for a zero value in the short distance instead of the distance.
Could you describe in more detail the implications of this change?... so far... this means?:
- all distances are now more accurate? - all formulas (lot of them) containing distance will behave different? - ACs have been nerfed due to the bigger value the distance is? - Target painters have been fixed and now they do affect ammo dps? - etc
please, tell us if this is a big change that affects many formulas?
thanks
Like I said this isn't a new functionality I just fixed a bug where we were checking a singularity of the short distance instead of the distance between the centers. _______________ |
|
Trimmok
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 11:09:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Why isn't there splash damage?
concord ftw hitting neutrals with splash would not be good
|
safrrr
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 13:20:00 -
[73]
Edited by: safrrr on 09/09/2009 13:20:40 so to get this straight, since the beginning of eve not a single person mentioned the 0 meters no damage thing up to now?
|
PJRiddick
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 14:56:00 -
[74]
Ive always notived it, but i thought it was built into the game. Ive been jumped before in WDs, having a Domi bum rush you with blasters a blazin is kind of an unsetteling feeling, untill they get to ZERO, then they tend to just shoot over you, gives you a chance to run, or live a little longer, just to die anyway. -=+>xXx<+=-
|
Blastil
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 15:35:00 -
[75]
you seem to have failed to fix a more problematic bug- the fact that you still cannot scan anything out. I suggest you stop, delay the patch, and FIX THIS PROBLEM before proceeding.
|
Judith Baker
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 16:05:00 -
[76]
Damn it. No more node crashes. And I was just startin to get the feel of it.
|
Ariane VoxDei
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 17:36:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Trimmok
Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Why isn't there splash damage?
concord ftw hitting neutrals with splash would not be good
Could result in a nuclear chain-reaction. Concord hits neutral/victim: criminal act Spawns more concord to punish the other concord who were hitting the neutral. Hitting concord is a crime, so further concord arrive to hit the corcord that are punishing the first concords. Hitting concord is a crime, .... And they would multiply and multiply, like the black monoliths and they will eventually ingnite a fusion process as the mass collapses to a point (taking out london where the server is based, and anything within 300 miles). This by itself does not spark WW3, but with tranquility gone, there are now about one hundred thousand EVE'ers, with a serious unsated craving for blowing up other peoples stuff, who are let loose on the world. And some of them are tech savvy too. And this world has fusion bomb, chemical and biological weapons, and nice spy satellites to get good closeup pictures of the fireworks of you could let all that loose.
So, do not let concord do splash damage, unless you want to depopulate the planet and make it unable to sustain human life for the next 50k+ years.
|
PJRiddick
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 18:12:00 -
[78]
OK i just tryed to post and for some reason it said that it was "reoprted" Go figure,...
Anyway,....
Hey CCP,... Are the sound issues going to be addressed anytime soon?
-=+>xXx<+=- Fly safe
|
Emily Spankratchet
Minmatar Pragmatics
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 18:13:00 -
[79]
Damn you all. I "work from home" on Thursdays. Now I'll have to actually work.
|
Some Advisor
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 22:38:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Ariane VoxDei
Originally by: Trimmok
Originally by: Odhinn Vinlandii Why isn't there splash damage?
concord ftw hitting neutrals with splash would not be good
Could result in a nuclear chain-reaction. Concord hits neutral/victim: criminal act Spawns more concord to punish the other concord who were hitting the neutral. Hitting concord is a crime, so further concord arrive to hit the corcord that are punishing the first concords. Hitting concord is a crime, .... And they would multiply and multiply, like the black monoliths and they will eventually ingnite a fusion process as the mass collapses to a point (taking out london where the server is based, and anything within 300 miles). This by itself does not spark WW3, but with tranquility gone, there are now about one hundred thousand EVE'ers, with a serious unsated craving for blowing up other peoples stuff, who are let loose on the world. And some of them are tech savvy too. And this world has fusion bomb, chemical and biological weapons, and nice spy satellites to get good closeup pictures of the fireworks of you could let all that loose.
So, do not let concord do splash damage, unless you want to depopulate the planet and make it unable to sustain human life for the next 50k+ years.
sooo.. in short
concord ftw hitting neutrals with splash would not be good
?
|
|
Johnny Trigger
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.09.09 23:40:00 -
[81]
roll back the directional scan delay. that is all you need to do.
|
wide
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:04:00 -
[82]
Edited by: wide on 10/09/2009 10:06:28
Originally by: PJRid**** CCP, actually the bug with the no hit at ZERO was a good thing, Heres why. Most of the pirates use blasters, and of course blasters are close range weapons. Most of the pirates jsut "APROACH" there victoms with there guns a blazing and tear there victoms up, this is something that you all know by now. Myself, im not a pirate nor do i go greafing people, The "NOHIT" at ZERO only gives the target a chance to survive a bit while the aggressor approaches but gets too close to his target shooting OVER his target. ON THE OTHER HAND,..... The HIT AT ZERO rule can work both ways, there has been several times that i have been aggressed AT ZERO and havetn been able to hit a damn thing, this just might the thing to help out the VICTOM a bit especially when he is in his mission ship. A couple good vollies at ZERO very well could turn the tide of a battle. This subject could very well go both ways. -=+>xXx<+=- Fly safe and remember no one is a ZERO in eve, atleast not in eve anymore
Trying selling your sour cup of whine to this guy
|
Commander Olmos
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:07:00 -
[83]
I aint been on for a few days... has the patch been relesed or is it still the 12:00 gmt thing ?
|
Mikal Drey
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:27:00 -
[84]
Quote: We believe that we have now fully eliminated desync issues as related to the physics simulation
1. so you "believe" but you could possibly be mistaken ?
2. i take it that there are various causes of desync but you have "solved" the physics part. which other parts of the desync issues are still remaining ? oh and a techy blog about what the causes were/are and how they were solved would be awesome :)
|
Bentani Prival
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:33:00 -
[85]
So errr, am i like jumping the gun or something? Because when i open up my eve client it tells me its incompatiable yet it doesnt have the prompt to download the patch, and when i go to the patch website i dont se the current build 99186 listed in the find version drop down.
|
Aeon Bishop
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:40:00 -
[86]
Err, downtime is until 12:00 GMT. Your post is from 10:33 GMT. What needs clarification here?
|
Kim Rafa
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:44:00 -
[87]
I guess this means dumb mega pilots will get some nice raven KMs lol
|
Lobster Man
Metafarmers
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 10:53:00 -
[88]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Originally by: Night Doc
Originally by: CCP Tuxford short note on the tracking formula.
There are basically two distances that are used in the calculations.
distance which is the distance from the center of the balls which is used for the tracking bit of the formula short distance which is the distance from the edge of the ball which is used for falloff.
This isn't new or introduced with this fix but maybe important to note nonetheless. What was the bug is that we were checking for a zero value in the short distance instead of the distance.
Could you describe in more detail the implications of this change?... so far... this means?:
- all distances are now more accurate? - all formulas (lot of them) containing distance will behave different? - ACs have been nerfed due to the bigger value the distance is? - Target painters have been fixed and now they do affect ammo dps? - etc
please, tell us if this is a big change that affects many formulas?
thanks
Like I said this isn't a new functionality I just fixed a bug where we were checking a singularity of the short distance instead of the distance between the centers.
Should we expect to see any kind of radically different amount of DPS in extreme short range combat (ex: blasters)?
|
seagood
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 11:02:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Lobster Man
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
Originally by: Night Doc
Originally by: CCP Tuxford short note on the tracking formula.
There are basically two distances that are used in the calculations.
distance which is the distance from the center of the balls which is used for the tracking bit of the formula short distance which is the distance from the edge of the ball which is used for falloff.
This isn't new or introduced with this fix but maybe important to note nonetheless. What was the bug is that we were checking for a zero value in the short distance instead of the distance.
Could you describe in more detail the implications of this change?... so far... this means?:
- all distances are now more accurate? - all formulas (lot of them) containing distance will behave different? - ACs have been nerfed due to the bigger value the distance is? - Target painters have been fixed and now they do affect ammo dps? - etc
please, tell us if this is a big change that affects many formulas?
thanks
Like I said this isn't a new functionality I just fixed a bug where we were checking a singularity of the short distance instead of the distance between the centers.
Should we expect to see any kind of radically different amount of DPS in extreme short range combat (ex: blasters)?
yep, that we should expect.
|
PJRiddick
|
Posted - 2009.09.10 11:25:00 -
[90]
NO my friend,..im not whining,....
Its just an observation. Us smart intenegent people do that from time to time.
-=+>xXx<+=- Fly safe and Eat your vegatables
Originally by: wide Edited by: wide on 10/09/2009 10:06:28
Originally by: PJRid**** CCP, actually the bug with the no hit at ZERO was a good thing, Heres why. Most of the pirates use blasters, and of course blasters are close range weapons. Most of the pirates jsut "APROACH" there victoms with there guns a blazing and tear there victoms up, this is something that you all know by now. Myself, im not a pirate nor do i go greafing people, The "NOHIT" at ZERO only gives the target a chance to survive a bit while the aggressor approaches but gets too close to his target shooting OVER his target. ON THE OTHER HAND,..... The HIT AT ZERO rule can work both ways, there has been several times that i have been aggressed AT ZERO and havetn been able to hit a damn thing, this just might the thing to help out the VICTOM a bit especially when he is in his mission ship. A couple good vollies at ZERO very well could turn the tide of a battle. This subject could very well go both ways. -=+>xXx<+=- Fly safe and remember no one is a ZERO in eve, atleast not in eve anymore
Trying selling your sour cup of whine to this guy
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |