| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
    |
Posted - 2011.06.21 01:16:00 -
[31]
Originally by: CCP Veritas
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
IIRC we just placed a minimum cap on the signal strength return you can get from a target. Don't remember off-hand what the exact number is, but it isn't very big.
Wouldn't this effectively mean that ANYBODY can scan anybody else's ship down even with minimal scanning skills ?
...I can't actually remember whether we capped the signature return or the base (radius/strength) value. I'll check in the morning.
Sig radius to scanner strength ratio is capped at a point that retains possibility of being scanned down. I believe you'll still find it quite hard to scan ships who have put effort into being difficult to scan.
Well, apparently they chose one of the best possible options.
Good job, I'd say.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Da Gooch
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 01:20:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Da Gooch on 21/06/2011 01:21:28
There goes missioning in NPC space.
GOODJOB CCP thanks for making our choices more limited, now i should go join a lol sea of blue corp or jump back to failpire, great, thanks, appreciate it alot.
Can we just remove 0.0 NPC space and be done with it, clearly the people who decide to live down there are not supposed to make any kind of income.
|
Ghurthe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 01:49:00 -
[33]
Oh? Did they simply make it such that you can make yourself damn close to impossible to scan down? if that's the case I'm ecstatic.
That's honestly the best way to have gone.
I'll see tomorrow =D
|
Srioghal moDhream
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 01:52:00 -
[34]
So can we get a monetary reimbursement for these practically useless implants now?
Most likely we might get them unplugged and placed in our holds, but since they are worthless now who will buy them for even a fraction that most people paid for them?
|
Barry Buttplug
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 02:05:00 -
[35]
good stuff
|
Portmanteau
CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 02:07:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Oh, and another thing: you didn't even make it harder to scan people down, did you? No full set of implants required, no max skills.... you simply caved to CCP Fallout, like a pudding.
You know, somewhere in these threads someone asked whether you got our back on this. I guess now we know: you didn't.
why exactly should it require a FULL SET OF IMPLANTS to scan someone down, what would be the point of buying a helios without implants in that case are u mental ?
L2directional u idiot, u already had it made easier with the addition of scan probes to the OV
|
Tetragammatron Prime
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 04:00:00 -
[37]
Back to the good old days.
Mash scan button. Dock up every few minutes to avoid getting probed down and having to quit your mission. Attempt to use a semi-pvp fit ship to do missions in the hope that you might ne able to fend off attackers. Then get jammed by 3 falcons. Use high sec/0.0 alt to make isk while preying on the other guys who haven't l2lowsec yet.
|
Cloora
APEX Unlimited
APEX Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 04:28:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Akita T
Sig radius to scanner strength ratio is capped at a point that retains possibility of being scanned down. I believe you'll still find it quite hard to scan ships who have put effort into being difficult to scan.
Well, apparently they chose one of the best possible options.
Good job, I'd say.
As someone who used unprobable T3 as deep safe gang boosters for PvP, I am releived this was how they "fixed it." I think the people running missions screwed it up for me. If I want to I'll just set up a small POS and keep them there in the systems I hunt in most.
I can still use my deep safes and just look out for probes on directional.
------------------------------------------
CEO and Major Shareholder of the APEX Conglomerate
Producer of Starsi brand softdrinks and Torped-Os! brand cereal as well as many other fine products |
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 04:59:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 21/06/2011 04:59:29
Originally by: Cloora
Originally by: Akita T
As someone who used unprobable T3 as deep safe gang boosters for PvP, I am releived this was how they "fixed it." I think the people running missions screwed it up for me.
Because we wouldn't want to nerf a real loophole, like off-grid boosting, right? /sarcasm
Sorry, dear, but I'd say it's you unprobable boosters who put the kaibash on unprobability, not the lonely mission runner.
--
 |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 05:45:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Vaerah Vahrokha on 21/06/2011 05:47:06
They should have nerfed off grid boosting as well.
When I asked CCP why they'd let people cheat (unprobeable fits use "smart" game mechanics pushed to beyond intended), I got replied (by players) "because the ships cost a lot".
That's not a valid excuse, you just can't justify buying out your invulnerability, be it cheap or not. And yes I hope SCs will be heavily nerfed next, they are as cheesy.
Also, those stating low sec will be deader: false.
You were just increasing the body count, not the interaction.
No one over there cares to see local bumped up by 2-3 units when those units are basically just farming high reward content without the tied risk, plus they put themselves out of the game.
Auditing | Research | 3rd Party | Collateral Holding | EvE RL Charity |
|
Trader Hansen
Failure Assured
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 07:05:00 -
[41]
CCP's first commandment: Thou shalt click directional scan every 2 seconds like an epileptic with parkinsons.
Anything that goes against this rule shall be nerfed. Heaven forbid CCP actually do something about stopping directional scans from being a repetetive click-fest.
|
IskPlease
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 10:39:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Trader Hansen
CCP's first commandment: Thou shalt click directional scan every 2 seconds like an epileptic with parkinsons.
Anything that goes against this rule shall be nerfed. Heaven forbid CCP actually do something about stopping directional scans from being a repetetive click-fest.
This. You do it or you die, but FFS, isn't it a ******ed game mechanic?
|
Lady Go Diveher
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 10:39:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
Sorry, dear, but I'd say it's you unprobable boosters who put the kaibash on unprobability, not the lonely mission runner.
The 'lonely' mission runner who just happens to have a massive effect not only on their own wealth, but of the entire LP market itself, at no risk 
You can't have your cake and eat it too, not here or anywhere.
|
Lady Go Diveher
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 10:42:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Trader Hansen
CCP's first commandment: Thou shalt click directional scan every 2 seconds like an epileptic with parkinsons.
Anything that goes against this rule shall be nerfed. Heaven forbid CCP actually do something about stopping directional scans from being a repetetive click-fest.
You can now make it so that your ship is only probable with *perfect* probing skills. It will take the prober, likely, several minutes to actually scan you, assuming they're even setup for max probe strength.
You can quite readily fit your ship to stop being a repetitive clickfest (really... once every 20seconds should be enough now). You just can't make it so you're impervious to any harm like a giant Jezebel.
|
The Newface
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:19:00 -
[45]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
While I donFt really agree with the solution itFs interesting to get the point of view from CCP. Apparently itFs not ok too tsafelyv earn isk/rewards.
Little bit oh highjack but if thatFs the point of view why is high sec ganking still not changed? ThatFs a action that it impossible to protect against, close to 100% safe for the ganker since insurance will pay back most of the ship cost and also have a high chance of netting the ganker some nice prices.
It is really time to remove the insurance payout from ships killed by concord.
|
Lady Go Diveher
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:25:00 -
[46]
Originally by: The Newface
[....]Little bit oh highjack but if thatFs the point of view why is high sec ganking still not changed? ThatFs a action that it impossible to protect against
I'm just gonna leave this here: Iteron can't be tanked. News at 11
I'm also just gonna guess that you're Ranka's alt, since her other daily whine is "WAAA NERF SUICIDE GANKING!!"
Hint: you lose around 40% of the ship cost, even on Platinum insurance, not including fittings, that will run you 10-15mil.
If you're carrying all that in a ship that can be one-shot then you're a loon.
|
5nipe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:55:00 -
[47]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
It wold be nice if you drop a line with a bit of information how the new ships scanning mechanics works.
So we can play and have some fun with EFT while extended downtime lasts.
|
Kamikaze jihawt
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:11:00 -
[48]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
You guys are so full of ****. It's actually sad really. These unprobable ships still risked being caught at gate camps, and stations. I do not understand CCP's policy/crusade to completely distroy every which way possible to make a decent buck/isk in this game. What is it to you guys? Oh wait, if we buy more plex's from you guys, you make more money. I got ya now. It has nothing to do with balance in game, but the balance in ccp's bank account. Go preach elsewhere, your logic isn't really logic, but an excuse to try and make you guys more money.
|
Space Wanderer
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:14:00 -
[49]
Originally by: 5nipe
It wold be nice if you drop a line with a bit of information how the new ships scanning mechanics works.
So we can play and have some fun with EFT while extended downtime lasts.
Back to the reverse engineering table for me... I'll try to come up with the updated sig str formula as soon as i can manage. I didn't know about the scanning changes otherwise I would have already tested them on SISI...
|
Lady Aja
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:26:00 -
[50]
just goes to show you have nfi do you?
Intel channels. alts and carriers make it possible.
me and four other pilots used to do level 4 & 5's together .
we would ALWAYS do missions in one system. never get probed down. as is was a dead end system. we used intel channels and alts to make sure when e ran 5's we was "safe"
as far as 5's... we all used stealth bombers. now it seems that fw missions get 100k lp+ for top end missions lol.
Originally by: Kamikaze jihawt
Edited by: Kamikaze jihawt on 21/06/2011 12:21:55
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
You guys are so full of ****. It's actually sad really. These unprobable ships still risked being caught at gate camps, and stations. I do not understand CCP's policy/crusade to completely destroy every which way possible to make a decent buck/isk in this game. What is it to you guys? Oh wait, if we buy more plex's from you guys, you make more money. I got ya now. It has nothing to do with balance in game, but the balance in ccp's bank account. Go preach elsewhere, your logic isn't really logic, but an excuse to try and make you guys more money.
 |
|
davet517
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:18:00 -
[51]
You can blame Burn Eden, and those who emulated them, really. CCP doesn't give a flip about unprobable mission runners. They would have happily let that go on forever. This is aimed squarely at unprobable snipers and the angst they caused.
Balance would have been needing a couple of billion worth of ship and implants to catch a ship that's unprobable, but costs that much to make it so. This isn't balance, it's CCP's poor attempt at "fairness" a.k.a. leveling the playing field between the haves and have nots.
They like to swagger around like Vikings, but they're turning into metrosexuals in their old age.
|
Cage Shadownsun
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:19:00 -
[52]
Edited by: Cage Shadownsun on 21/06/2011 13:20:31
Originally by: Kamikaze jihawt
Edited by: Kamikaze jihawt on 21/06/2011 12:21:55
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
You guys are so full of ****. It's actually sad really. These unprobable ships still risked being caught at gate camps, and stations. I do not understand CCP's policy/crusade to completely destroy every which way possible to make a decent buck/isk in this game. What is it to you guys? Oh wait, if we buy more plex's from you guys, you make more money. I got ya now. It has nothing to do with balance in game, but the balance in ccp's bank account. Go preach elsewhere, your logic isn't really logic, but an excuse to try and make you guys more money.
I love watching players try to tell the Developers how to develop their game.
What kind of excuse is "They could get caught at gate camps and stations!"? So can every other ship in the game. Use your head a bit more.
|
Ghurthe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:27:00 -
[53]
I agree that unprobeable is wrong.
I think that if you have a fitting that used to be unprobeable, people trying to scan you down should need best in game sensor strength on their probes. IE. Full implant set, sisters launcher, sisters probes, max skills.
It's not to say that a person in a mission is impossible to find, just very difficult, because when you do find them, they're already out 2-4 Med Slots from their ECCM. That delay in scanning you down is the balance it should afford.
That being said, I'm likely going to stop or slow down my level 5 mission running machine, partly because I've grown weary of them, partly because I like to drink and run Convoy Attack, which takes a good 10 minutes or so.
There are still plenty of level 5s that are easy enough to run even without unscannable fits. Alluring Emanations comes to mind.
Fact of the matter is, I want to see what CCP has done to being probed out and the new math associated. I hope that with a high enough sensor str and a low enough sig you're effectively nearly impossible to locate without dumping a huge pile of isk on implants to find me.
Personally I'd prefer this, partly so that I can mission safe-ish. Partly because the local pirates in my area might like my Low-Grade Virtues and perfect scan skills to help them out.
|
The Newface
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:27:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
Originally by: The Newface
[....]Little bit oh highjack but if thatFs the point of view why is high sec ganking still not changed? ThatFs a action that it impossible to protect against
I'm just gonna leave this here: Iteron can't be tanked. News at 11
I'm also just gonna guess that you're Ranka's alt, since her other daily whine is "WAAA NERF SUICIDE GANKING!!"
Hint: you lose around 40% of the ship cost, even on Platinum insurance, not including fittings, that will run you 10-15mil.
If you're carrying all that in a ship that can be one-shot then you're a loon.
No, i am an alt but not Ranka's.
I just donFt think that mechanism is very good, and even though it doesnFt mean anything i am not a high sec miner. I run 4 accounts and spend 90% of my time in 0.0 with a small corp (kind of destroyed right now though)
But there is no reason to allow high sec ganking to be as profitable as it is, heck you donFt even need faction to drop to earn money and there is no protection for the miner except docking up. ThatFs a failed mechanism right there.
Again I donFt think ganking should be removed but it should not be profitable to gank miners in high sec for T2 drops.
|
5nipe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 14:46:00 -
[55]
Edited by: 5nipe on 21/06/2011 14:47:37
Originally by: Ghurthe
Fact of the matter is, I want to see what CCP has done to being probed out and the new math associated.
Patch Notes:
Scanning
It is no longer possible to set up a ship to be impervious to scanning while uncloaked.
All probes can now contribute to a scan result, as opposed to the previous limit of four.
Just have tested on SiSi:
Classical Tengu with Sensor stranght 168 and sig radius 150m been easily scanned with 7 probes and perfect prober (skills, gear and imps).
4 sisters combat probes (0.5AU) - 65%
5 -81%
6- 89%
7- 100%
It is about bring your "unscanable" ship(s) to the cutting age now in terms of been very, very difficult (and time consuming) to be scanned.
Sig radius decreasing boosters, crossed remote ECCM boosters, implants, bonuses from command ship for sensor strength. what else?
On the other hand scanning cosmic signatures for exploration even easier now!
|
Ghurthe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 14:52:00 -
[56]
Originally by: 5nipe
Edited by: 5nipe on 21/06/2011 14:47:37
Originally by: Ghurthe
Fact of the matter is, I want to see what CCP has done to being probed out and the new math associated.
Patch Notes:
Scanning
It is no longer possible to set up a ship to be impervious to scanning while uncloaked.
All probes can now contribute to a scan result, as opposed to the previous limit of four.
Just have tested on SiSi:
Classical Tengu with Sensor stranght 168 and sig radius 150m been easily scanned with 7 probes and perfect prober (skills, gear and imps).
4 sisters combat probes (0.5AU) - 65%
5 -81%
6- 89%
7- 100%
It is about bring your "unscanable" ship(s) to the cutting age now in terms of been very, very difficult (and time consuming) to be scanned.
Sig radius decreasing boosters, crossed remote ECCM boosters, implants, bonuses from command ship for sensor strength. what else?
On the other hand scanning cosmic signatures for exploration even easier now!
Oooo, ty =) yeah, that means i'll probably be done with level 5s that take anything longer than 2 minutes to complete.
What about a proteus with 4 ECCM or a bomber with 2?
How easy are those to scan out? Also, can you tell me how easy it is to scan things out without the implants? I'd do the legwork myself but I'm at work.
|
OllieNorth
Gallente
Interstellar Entrepreneurs
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 15:46:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Kamikaze jihawt
Edited by: Kamikaze jihawt on 21/06/2011 12:21:55
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
You guys are so full of ****. It's actually sad really. These unprobable ships still risked being caught at gate camps, and stations. I do not understand CCP's policy/crusade to completely destroy every which way possible to make a decent buck/isk in this game. What is it to you guys? Oh wait, if we buy more plex's from you guys, you make more money. I got ya now. It has nothing to do with balance in game, but the balance in ccp's bank account. Go preach elsewhere, your logic isn't really logic, but an excuse to try and make you guys more money.
Is it possible that CCP might actually WANT to limit the mission iskfaucet? Besides PLEX sales, limiting ISK flow might make your caps (SCs!!) a little more exclusive. It seems to me that CCP would rather not have 200 SC hotdrop fleets around every corner. Then again I might just be another cog in the machine trying to harsh your easy iskies. 
|
Cuko
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 15:47:00 -
[58]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
|
Ghurthe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 15:50:00 -
[59]
Originally by: OllieNorth
Is it possible that CCP might actually WANT to limit the mission iskfaucet? Besides PLEX sales, limiting ISK flow might make your caps (SCs!!) a little more exclusive. It seems to me that CCP would rather not have 200 SC hotdrop fleets around every corner. Then again I might just be another cog in the machine trying to harsh your easy iskies.
Well the best way to help nerf the super cap blobs is to move ice to lowsec / 0.0 that'd make them way more costly. Also, they NEED to rebalance Supers and Titans, because honestly they're stupid OP.
I have a super and I'm for the changes because sov warfare is BOORING
|
iudex
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 16:55:00 -
[60]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
I'm one of those 0.0-missionrunners-in-hostile-space and was one of the first to use the Tengu for that purpose. During the years I lost quite a lot Tengus despite being unprobable. It happened on gates to systems without stations (no way to refit a cloak), it happened due to bubbles (bouncer-bubble-traps) when I didn't use a interdiction nullifier and to many other mistakes.
And it happens to sensor boosted artillery-alpha-strike station campers (when the undock-angle is inappropriate and it takes 2-3 seconds to enter warp). Example: killmail
I was hard to catch, but this guys apparently knew EVE better than you and found ways to regularly kill me anyways. Now they won't kill me anymore a singe time.
Why ? Because I'm not dumb enough to do missions in a permanently hostile space, when I can be probed. The other Tengu-pilots won't be as well, you effectively removed that option from game.
Congratulation Sir, you not only ruined my 0.0-missionrunner-gameplay but also deny 0.0 local inhabitants some regular Tengu kills. Do you really believe, you just "improved" EVE ?
__________________________
http://eveboard.com/pilot/iudex |
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |