Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Frau Klaps
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 06:01:00 -
[91]
Originally by: Mizar Alcor Priceless...
After reading Jab after Jab this popped up and I pee'd a little laughing...
It really was getting too pathetic ~~~
|
Assaj Ventress
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 06:41:00 -
[92]
Originally by: Ranka Mei Edited by: Ranka Mei on 21/06/2011 05:16:10
Originally by: Darth Vapour Quick test on sisi:
-A stealth bomber with 3 ECCM II (90+ sensor strength vs 39 sig) was probable with 8 faction probes, max skills, bonus ship and a virtue set -After unplugging the virtues and with only two ECCM active it went down to a 76% result with 8 probes
Investing in Virtue implants will be required to get ships with currently unprobable setups.
Thanks for the heads-up.
90/39, that's not the sort of ratio one can get on a Tengu. :) Usually it's more like 146/150 (was still unprobable); or 229/150, if you go real extreme. So, I'll have to figure out how the old ratios work out for a Tengu exactly.
CCP Veritas mentioned that they capped the sensor strength/sig radius ratio, so 90/39 capped and 146/150 capped might be pretty close) -----------------
|
Val'Dore
Word Bearers of Chaos Word of Chaos Undivided
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 06:45:00 -
[93]
Originally by: Desert Ice78 Greyscale you ****.
Fail pvp whiners "Eve is too hard, make it better CCP" win again.
Starting to notice a pattern here.
Unless I am mistaken, the change makes it hard as opposed to impossible. What are you whining about?
~No matter what happens, somebody will find a way to take it too seriously.~
Tiericide |
Prince of Nigeria
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 06:53:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Ranka Mei
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.
(The ability to create an unprobeable fit has always been an anomaly with the scanning system, and the opportunity came up to close the loophole while doing some related work. There are specific modules to make you unfindable in space - ie cloaks - and they have specific restrictions and drawbacks to balance this out. We're aware that making this change will make certain otherwise-legitimate activities significantly less viable, but most of the ones we're aware of really need to be fixed properly down the road rather than band-aided in this way, and in the meantime we're sufficiently uncomfortable with the subversion of intended mechanics that such workarounds require that on balance we don't feel they're good reason to keep this loophole open. Sorry.)
And is using an alt to web your own freighter, so it will go to near insta-warp, a loophole too? Point being, why can't you folks simply celebrate people's inventiveness and leave it at that? Every time people find good ways to defend themselves, along comes CCP with a nerfbat!
And balance? Don't make me laugh. Did you also make it easier to find probes? Did you also do something about high-sec suicide ganking insurance payouts? Of course not. Because PvP is really the only thing you devs want at heart (and who can blame you? You can just pick unlimited gear and isk from the database).
Well, I gotta hand it to you: you did strike a big blow for piracy today. I'm sure you made a lot of people happy.
If you want PvE, you're playing the wrong game.
No, this isn't an insult. It's the ****ing truth. This is EVE. This game was designed for PVP. There's plenty of hard-as-nails PVE MMO's out there. FFXI, for instance, has some good ideas and mechanics despite how outdated it is.
|
Cebraio
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 10:24:00 -
[95]
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.
(The ability to create an unprobeable fit has always been an anomaly with the scanning system, and the opportunity came up to close the loophole while doing some related work. There are specific modules to make you unfindable in space - ie cloaks - and they have specific restrictions and drawbacks to balance this out. We're aware that making this change will make certain otherwise-legitimate activities significantly less viable, but most of the ones we're aware of really need to be fixed properly down the road rather than band-aided in this way, and in the meantime we're sufficiently uncomfortable with the subversion of intended mechanics that such workarounds require that on balance we don't feel they're good reason to keep this loophole open. Sorry.)
You DO know that becoming unprobable also requires/d some efforts and has drawbacks, right? Namely fitting two modules that are otherwise pretty useless for PVE and using a full set of expensive implants. Just saying.
|
Sarmatiko
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:05:00 -
[96]
What about the other change:
Quote: NPCs will now correctly aggress a decloaking ship
Does it mean that CCP closed another loophole and stealth bombers now can't do lvl 5 missions?
|
brute killer
GRAIL SEEKERS P I R A T E S
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:11:00 -
[97]
This is truly a great change,
However
Low sec will soon be a collection of ghost system, a barren waste with no reason to enter it.
Give low sec a boost ! especially as I can not spin my ship in station anymore lol |
Lucilla Giulia
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:18:00 -
[98]
Originally by: Frau Klaps
rofl this made my "withouth eve i can't live" day
|
Psihius
Caldari Anarchist Dawn U N K N O W N
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:21:00 -
[99]
Originally by: brute killer This is truly a great change,
However
Low sec will soon be a collection of ghost system, a barren waste with no reason to enter it.
Give low sec a boost ! especially as I can not spin my ship in station anymore lol
My stealth bomber will be very happy to run level 5 with no local present :D --------------------------------------------------
Originally by: Blacksquirrel This is EVE. PVE can happen anywhere at anytime. Be prepared.
|
IskPlease
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:23:00 -
[100]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 21/06/2011 04:23:39
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.
(The ability to create an unprobeable fit has always been an anomaly with the scanning system, and the opportunity came up to close the loophole while doing some related work. There are specific modules to make you unfindable in space - ie cloaks - and they have specific restrictions and drawbacks to balance this out. We're aware that making this change will make certain otherwise-legitimate activities significantly less viable, but most of the ones we're aware of really need to be fixed properly down the road rather than band-aided in this way, and in the meantime we're sufficiently uncomfortable with the subversion of intended mechanics that such workarounds require that on balance we don't feel they're good reason to keep this loophole open. Sorry.)
sandbox...
next kill MWD + cloak?
If they decided unprobeability was a loophole and not a feature then they'd be huge hypocrites not to get rid of the MWD+cloak thing. Seeing as ships with covert ops cloaks are quite gimped, why are people able to slap a plain cloak on a ship and get the same benefits in avoiding pvp?!
|
|
Mr R4nd0m
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:24:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Corina's Bodyguard I agree. Also means botters can be hunted down if they don't fit a cloak.
Lol since when do they never fit a cloak?
|
Bruno Bourque
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:32:00 -
[102]
Patch after patch we are seeing "features" discovered by players being "fixed".
Eve is meant to be a sandbox, what kind of sandbox is it if you are forcing people to play it the way YOU want it to be played?
Yes I run a previously unscanable Tengu for missions, it pays for my PvP. Im not going to stop using it, it just means I have to watch for probes again.
The point is CCP goes on about how players make the story, its a sandbox. Truth is, it becomes less of a sandbox every time something like this gets "fixed".
I read through the patch notes and for me, a PvP'er living in NPC 0.0 space, I have lost something and gained nothing for this 800 Meg download. Walking in stations, its going to be used for 2 minutes by most of the Eve Community. I just hope I can turn it off.
|
Azure Moonlight
Atomic Core Industries and Science
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:54:00 -
[103]
Edited by: Azure Moonlight on 21/06/2011 11:55:38 I was really looking forward to this patch, now reading this I ****in hate it. Making a ship unscannable was a great feature of Eve if you wanted to explore low-sec or be somewhat secure from suicide ganking in mission hubs (which by the way I consider a far more broken thing than anything else) Eve being a PvP game might actually be true for some players, but a lot more casual players enjoy a laid-back after work missioning, doing industry jobs, PI and all the other great futures. Exploring the more dangerous places of Eve without actually engaging in player versus player (or more likely me against a roaming gang I wont ever stand a chance against as a casual player) I counted as thrilling and an interesting adventure.
With the ability to make one ship unscannable you increased in a smart way your survivability in hostile regions which made the game more thrilling. Also note how hard it is to fit an unscannable ship and what drawbacks in terms of firepower or tanking you will experience. Having an unscannable ship often resulted in a player working harder and being smarter than you normally had to, only to be somehow secure from ganking, roaming gangs and general griefplay.
Besides you realize doing missions in low sec still requires you to dock/undock and use jump gates. And to find a ratting ship you use the onboard scanner.
So for everyone stating unscannable ships were a broken thing open for abuse, I say this: Killing this feature is a broken thing resulting in Eve being less complex, interesting and less open and rewarding for unique and smart playstyle.
Both thumbs down!
|
XJennieX
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:58:00 -
[104]
i welcome this. now all LP i have stored is gonna get more valuable as people stop (almost) completely running lvl5 missions \0/ also some leet groups running unprobable bonus t3 ships and snipe machariels with eccm mods gets slap on the face.
|
Frau Klaps
Amarr Trillionaire High-Rollers Suicidal Bassoon Orkesta
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 11:59:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Azure Moonlight Eve being a PvP game might actually be true for some players, but a lot more casual players enjoy a laid-back after work missioning, doing industry jobs, PI and all the other great futures. Exploring the more dangerous places of Eve without actually engaging in player versus player (or more likely me against a roaming gang I wont ever stand a chance against as a casual player) I counted as thrilling and an interesting adventure.
Unless you pay me 1b ISK within 48 hours of Incarna going live, you can expect a wardec TBH. ~~~
|
Illwill Bill
For a fistful of Veldspar
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:02:00 -
[106]
While you're at it, fix jetcan mining. /me hides.
Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Revenge is a dish best served with auto-cannons.
|
Louis deGuerre
Gallente Malevolence. Imperial 0rder
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:03:00 -
[107]
First order of business tonight, scan down that AFK-[undesirable invididual] in his 'unprobable' tengu and pod seven kinds of [censored] out of him
Next patch, counter for AFK cloakers ? ----- Malevolence. is recruiting. Dive into the world of 0.0 !
|
Azure Moonlight
Atomic Core Industries and Science
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:13:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Frau Klaps
Originally by: Azure Moonlight Eve being a PvP game might actually be true for some players, but a lot more casual players enjoy a laid-back after work missioning, doing industry jobs, PI and all the other great futures. Exploring the more dangerous places of Eve without actually engaging in player versus player (or more likely me against a roaming gang I wont ever stand a chance against as a casual player) I counted as thrilling and an interesting adventure.
Unless you pay me 1b ISK within 48 hours of Incarna going live, you can expect a wardec TBH.
Better send me the wardec fee, its a char in training
|
XJennieX
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:15:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Psihius
Originally by: brute killer This is truly a great change,
However
Low sec will soon be a collection of ghost system, a barren waste with no reason to enter it.
Give low sec a boost ! especially as I can not spin my ship in station anymore lol
My stealth bomber will be very happy to run level 5 with no local present :D
no it wont:
NPCs will now correctly aggress a decloaking ship
|
Ineka
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:16:00 -
[110]
Originally by: Sarmatiko From Incarna patchnotes:
Quote: It is no longer possible to set up a ship to be impervious to scanning while uncloaked.
Come on CCP tell us that those can't-scan-me-Tengubears will die right after this patch! Best change so far
They will just move in to high sec, brilliant.
You can start telling CCP how incapable you are to do a minimum work to find an improbable ship and kill him. You can also start smashing you balls, if you have any witch I doubt, because now you have to return high sec grief noobs to feed you KB.
Idiot.
|
|
Azure Moonlight
Atomic Core Industries and Science
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:16:00 -
[111]
Originally by: XJennieX
Originally by: Psihius
Originally by: brute killer This is truly a great change,
However
Low sec will soon be a collection of ghost system, a barren waste with no reason to enter it.
Give low sec a boost ! especially as I can not spin my ship in station anymore lol
My stealth bomber will be very happy to run level 5 with no local present :D
no it wont:
NPCs will now correctly aggress a decloaking ship
Now that was a thing that needed fixing, because it was clearly not a feature but a bug.
|
Laser Purification
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:34:00 -
[112]
Glad it's changed. Unprobeable battleships sniping a gate at hundreds of K and fleet bonus carriers in safe spots were pretty lame.
|
Shandir
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 12:36:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Ineka Rantrantrantrantrant
You seem mad. Why not relax and have a Quafe? -
|
EyeCanHazNyx
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:20:00 -
[114]
What?
You mean to tell me that there is now some Risk in low/nullsec?
NOT IN MY EVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Big shlong Johnson
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:20:00 -
[115]
hah try exploiting lvl5 missions now with your unprobable tengus and bugged bombers.
|
Azure Moonlight
Atomic Core Industries and Science
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:26:00 -
[116]
Why am I under the impression most players never tried to fit&fly an unscannable ship? You act as if getting one in the first place was the easiest thing ever and once you had it you were invincible in low sec space or generally in Eve.
Get some facts first ;)
|
Womanises Well
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:31:00 -
[117]
So, no more free nightmares ?
|
Jaxemont
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:40:00 -
[118]
Originally by: Azure Moonlight Why am I under the impression most players never tried to fit&fly an unscannable ship? You act as if getting one in the first place was the easiest thing ever and once you had it you were invincible in low sec space or generally in Eve.
Get some facts first ;)
Why do you act as if being unprobable was a feature and not a bug? CCP has mentioned that it was not an intended feature of scanning, and now the exploit is fixed.
Get some facts first ;)
Just because it wasn't easy to pull off doesn't justify the existence of the exploit.
|
Global Comms
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 13:42:00 -
[119]
Originally by: IskPlease
next kill MWD + cloak? If they decided unprobeability was a loophole and not a feature then they'd be huge hypocrites not to get rid of the MWD+cloak thing. Seeing as ships with covert ops cloaks are quite gimped, why are people able to slap a plain cloak on a ship and get the same benefits in avoiding pvp?!
Beacuse CCP fail at coding and cannot fix the problem.
|
Jon Whayne
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 14:05:00 -
[120]
First of all, I hate this change. But I feel so terribly ****ed about this, so that I guess I should give you guys a bit more details on this:
1) I do really hate this change. Let me carebar more and laugh about f***king pirates trying to scan me down, bah!
2) I do hate you.
3) I do hate the way you put really drastic stuff in like what? One sentence in a patchnote. Shame on you.
Eh, and let me whine please. please.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |