Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 51 post(s) |
Omnathious Deninard
The Scope Gallente Federation
1054
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:09:00 -
[301] - Quote
I did a high sec mag site on tq and got better loot than most every site I have done on sisi. I cant say every because I have gotten a couple good drops, but not often enough to want to continue with the spew mechanics. Ideas For Drone Improvement Repourpose Deep Space Scanner Probes |
Brainless Bimbo
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
56
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:11:00 -
[302] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:If you're going to quote me, please do so completely. I didn't say I agree it's easy. I said that it's reasonably easy. Specifically, I said it balances well between skill requirements and reasonable ease.
As for my window settings.. Windows are R/G/B @ 0 with Transparency @ 145 and Background is R/G/B @ 11 with Transparency at 210. Given that the Background isn't very transparent (I use unpinned windows to block out the sun sometimes) I'm going to say that the hacking game probably uses the Window settings for the main area rather than the Background settings.
I got some Decryptors from a hacking site. I assume they were in "Data" canisters, but I wasn't really paying attention to the names so much as I was zoomed out a ways trying to analyze the general movement of the mini-container cloud and move along with it.
Missioning and combat in general are outside the scope of the overall discussion, but I will say that the results are considerably less randomly-generated and overwhelmingly more player-controlled than the current hacking/analyzing on TQ.
thanks for feed back re background of hacking mini game, LOL i-¦m totally BB, forgot that transparency is option in Esc menu General Settings tab, so used to where its set and working with it. Apologies to CCP, i get a touch of forgetful moron on settings and hot key settings and i-¦m not afraid to admit it.
yeah atm, decent drops that i have got have come from data-¦s after noticing the order of them in the cargo hold, this is imo bad as it removes the chance element that CCP are going after. Personally they would be all i targeted at spawn time as the rest is not worth the clicks, this is i suggest the same for the rest of the player base.
the other were regards current game mechanics and how they are the same over everything, introducing a game within a game is a quantum shift in direction.
CCP-¦s New Motto: Shiny over Substance |
AutumnWind1983
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
46
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:42:00 -
[303] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Altrue wrote:Any other comment about this method ? For me, releasing an unfinished feature and improving it a few weeks later should be for the test-server only. We are not talking about a fix or something that has a high priority, we are talking about a rewamp of something functional (btw there were so many other things to rewamp first... *ahem* POSes *cough* *cough*).
Also, I'm still waiting for this new version of Planetary Interaction... Oh wait, we already know what happens to unfinished-but-somehow-stable features in Eve.
The probabilities to see an interesting minigame post Odyssey 1.0 are thus extremely low. Based on past performance I can see why people are skeptical that we will continue to improve features immediately post-release. Planetary Interaction is a good example of a feature that could really do with some more depth added to it. However if people say "why aren't you revamping system X instead" then we always be releasing and abandoning things. Once something is out the best time to improve it is immediately afterwards. To answer the "unfinished feature" point. We aren't releasing anything unfinished. We're releasing what we consider the minimum amount to consider the feature complete. That doesn't mean we've not got ideas that ended up on the cutting room floor because that's the nature of the developing any project that needs to fit within a set timeline. It also doesn't mean we are satisfied with the current state of things. It means as you note that the feature is functional and goes towards what we would ultimately like to achieve. It also lets us see how things fit in and interact with the live universe which is inherently different to any test server. Particularly when considering features that rely much more on player interaction. Improving iteratively is just sensible from this point of view in terms of validating what we are doing.
CCP's recent work with iterating FW and ship balancing has given some confidence CCP can work with a system to improve it. However, you need to recognize you're fighting against 8 years of experience that CCP doesn't do that. Wormholes were last touched in March of 2009. Sov in Dec of 2009. CCP is just now dealing with Tech. This ignores the sucking chest wounds that are the industry interface, corp roles, and pos's. James Arget for CSM 8! http://csm.fcftw.org |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
58
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:45:00 -
[304] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:other players can boost the hacking player using a script on the hacking module Generally I like your approach, but this here is a horrible idea, that's 100% alt gameplay, not friend gameplay. There needs to be some realtime active gameplay by the other player in the group or it's just gonna be alts. Still I agree that loot spewing is not a good way to do it, there should be a way to make the friend join in the hacking minigame.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Aegis Solaris
1890
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:50:00 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Manssell wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:Morning update post!
GǪ.One of the things weGÇÖve been trying to do is make exploration an actual profession with its own ships, modules etc. Removing the NPCs were a part of that, but re-adding them as a failure mechanic doesnGÇÖt really fit. WeGÇÖre going to take the GÇ£hacking failedGÇ¥ penalty NPC waves out and instead put a dynamic counter for cans in. So for example, a successful hack scatters 12 loot containers, but if you fail the first attempt and youGÇÖre successful on the 2nd, it scatters 14 containers. We feel this make the profession more coherent.
While I feel that within the current design this will be a big improvement, it does beg the question of what does this mean when the "new" supposedly fun gameplay mechanic you are adding into this profession, slightly magnified, is in fact the punishment for failure mechanic also? I don't really mind punishing failure, it's more about what tools you have to do what. When you run missions, you have a combat ship. When you mine, you have a miner. When you do exploration, you should have a fitting ship. Exploration ships shouldn't have the tools combat ships have, but instead have benefits to that profession (like the bonuses to the ships). That doesn't mean there can't be failure mechanic, it just can't be based on something we actively discourage you to carry tools for (combat for example). CCP Soundwave, doing exploration is more than doing Data and Relic sites, its also about doing combat sites. For high sec a properly fit exploration ship has
A probe launcher A salvager Relic and Hacking modules Sufficient DPS and tank to do a 4/10 site All on a hull that can get into a 3/10 site
Please insure we explorers have this option.
Why? Because when you are 10 jumps away from your home base its a real annoyance to find content you cannot do because your special purpose ship is a 20 jump round trip away. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
M'aak'han
C-7
25
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 16:55:00 -
[306] - Quote
Luc Chastot wrote:Recovery should be automatic when you are 2000m or less away from a container, but still limited to 1 at a time.
Here, listen to this man CCP, if you really want to keep the pi+¦ata in. With loot equally distributed amongst the mini-cans it should work. Of course, multi-boxers will have an easier time, but better that than turning most of the players away from profession sites.
Still, a complete removal of this mechanic on a successful hack would be better. As others have already stated, the current system looks more like a punishment than a reward.
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
1842
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 17:02:00 -
[307] - Quote
Rob Crowley wrote:Abrazzar wrote:other players can boost the hacking player using a script on the hacking module Generally I like your approach, but this here is a horrible idea, that's 100% alt gameplay, not friend gameplay. There needs to be some realtime active gameplay by the other player in the group or it's just gonna be alts. Still I agree that loot spewing is not a good way to do it, there should be a way to make the friend join in the hacking minigame. Basically every existing activity in EVE that can be done with more than one play can currently be done with an alt, including PvP combat. And considering that exploration has been a mostly solo activity to begin with, I don't see the point of pushing game mechanics that make alt-play impossible. Just a look at the pi+¦ata shows how those attempts turn out.
With the hacking mini game, the advantage will be the extra pair of eyes you get from a second player and the safety by numbers in lower security space. High-sec sites could be balanced to benefit the least from a second player. The lower security space can benefit more with deeper levels that scale up loot accordingly. After all, you will risk several ships then to hostile encounters. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Raven Solaris
The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance
180
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 17:18:00 -
[308] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:I say it again: Remove the pi+¦ata, remove the garbage, focus on the hacking game.
- nodes in the hacking game add a item from a specific loot table to the stash
- hacking the core allows you to release the stash or dig deeper into the system
- deeper levels have greater difficulty, depth of the system depends on the site/security/object
- failing in the hack locks the site, no rats, no explosions, just system lockdown
- failing the hack forfeits the stash, permadeath, a failure penalty you feel
- other players can boost the hacking player using a script on the hacking module
- can only activate one module on another player per ship
- allows taking turns with the hacking game without compromising the fit
- makes co-op more profitable as boosted hackers can go in deeper/open more items/finish the hack quicker
And this is just from the top of my head.
Having played around with it a bit, I like this a lot.
The hacking game is a bit simple right now, but there's so much potential there for it to be fun and interesting, the loot pinata on the other hand, is going to be annoying and embarassing no matter what.
It reminds me of an old game show called The Crystal Maze come to think of it. The puzzles and games the teams did were always awesome, as was the commentary of Richard O'Brien, the ending where they jumped around trying to grab tickets wasn't. |
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
2024
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 17:18:00 -
[309] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Thanks for the feedback guys.
I'll outline some of my thoughts for the next iteration of the hacking as people have noted it's quite 'light' at the moment on strategy. In part this is due to a scoping down of the initial design which had Utilities as items in EVE that could be collected and traded on the market. This would let you fit your module prior to hacking which adds a whole bunch of decision making depth to the hacking itself. This is the first thing I want to put in post-release as not only does it make things much more interesting, it adds in a new way for hacking to generate income and the current design goes against our no closed systems design principle. We also have a whole bunch of more interesting Defense Subsystems and Utilities to add in to increase the variety of things you encounter. On top of which we are considering some ideas for Utilities that let you deploy Virus Subsystems into the systems you are hacking and passive Utilities that take up space but provide a bonus. This should all lead to more interesting choices to make on how you hack.
This is a start, not the end. :)
Why is it every new feature CCP adds reads like this:
"Hey guys, we've got a new car for you to drive! Look, it's got racing stripes and cool wheels!"
(feedback)
"Well, we're still working on how many seats to put in the car and how fast it will be, but it's gonna be great!"
(feedback)
"Well, the engine had to be scoped out at the last minute, but the car will roll down hill quite nicely. But we're sure you'll like it, and just you wait until we iterate!"
"Implementation"
(!FEEDBACK!)
"oOPS, sorry?"
(Facepalm)
I find that without a good mob to provide one for them, most people would have no mentality at all. |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
58
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 17:25:00 -
[310] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Basically every existing activity in EVE that can be done with more than one play can currently be done with an alt, including PvP combat. Sure, if you don't mind losing the fights against someone who knows what he's doing you can try multi-boxing PvP.
Quote:And considering that exploration has been a mostly solo activity to begin with, I don't see the point of pushing game mechanics that make alt-play impossible. Personally I think anti-alt measures are a good thing, but even if you don't agree with this that's still no reason to add new alt gameplay like you proposed.
Quote:With the hacking mini game, the advantage will be the extra pair of eyes you get from a second player and the safety by numbers in lower security space. That's alright, but that doesn't require the mechanic you proposed. |
|
kyofu
Praetorian Black Guard Frater Adhuc Excessum
14
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 18:00:00 -
[311] - Quote
M'aak'han wrote:Luc Chastot wrote:Recovery should be automatic when you are 2000m or less away from a container, but still limited to 1 at a time. Here, listen to this man CCP, if you really want to keep the pi+¦ata in. With loot equally distributed amongst the mini-cans it should work. Of course, multi-boxers will have an easier time, but better that than turning most of the players away from profession sites. Still, a complete removal of this mechanic on a successful hack would be better. As others have already stated, the current system looks more like a punishment than a reward.
Dear CCP,
I hate the loot Pinata, as does I believe the entire posting player base. I think adding a new skill or two specifically relevant to the hacking game, and adding loot cache type nodes and other interesting features to the mini-game would be a far more interesting way to approach it.
However if nothing we can say or do will convince you how unsuited and just bad the spew mechanic is then at least pay attention to the quoted posts as a potential compromise.
Thanks.
-Kyo |
dethleffs
Immortalis Inc. Shadow Cartel
188
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 19:10:00 -
[312] - Quote
Christ. This is depressing. The hacking game is ok, but theres no sense of direction.
Sites where far and few in between - found one buggy site: Sansha regional data fortress - cant reach the spew containers - bumping off an amarr station wreck
I made 32 jumps, found 5 sites made 600,000 isk.
Other things I noticed where:
the radial menu where you enable the scanner overlay never closes if you pick an option, so you have to press escape.
Scan results lose focus and thus wont show up after a completed scan cycle. You have to click on them to see them in the system map again.
The lootpuke mechanic is horrible: combine low fps clouds (i know that will be fixed) + eve's horrible bumping mechanic on structures + maniacally clicking little icons in space and you get by far the worst mechanic ccp ever invented for exploration.
Its worse than making hundreds of bookmarks to get a no overlap probe placement and have to carry 24 different kinds of probes with you to wait on timers exceeding 2 minutes to get **** loot.
|
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
50
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 19:30:00 -
[313] - Quote
Talking about radial menu. That's another thing that makes the loot spew so crap as it constantly pops up for me when i try to get the tiny cans. |
Narjack
CragCO
4
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 19:39:00 -
[314] - Quote
CCP,
You want to make exploration a profession? Well, it kind of was already was no? However, your system of taking all the rats out, except WH's (and thank you for at least that ) has the effect of negating a big part of any profession. That part is progression. Increasingly more difficult rats in sites meant you needed better ships to do them in. More SP. Now you can run it all in a covops. Too little risk for too much reward. Nothing to really look forward to over time. It will get stale quickly. Great for new players perhaps...at the expense of your tried and true stalwart subscribers. And over time, those new guys will get bored with it.
I guess the mini-game is here to say, though I would have been much happier with you guys just building a bunch of new cool sites to go out and find, or maybe some kind of uber dangerous WH space that has no moons, no planets, nothing but deadly sites to run. I don't know, like stuff to..... explore. It would be nice if you guys filled out some of the loot table and created a whole new bunch of faction drone stuff as many of the non-rated drone sites are currently not worth doing.
I mean we have all these new cool drone damage amplifiers --- why not some other meta versions? Same for the other mods. How about meta versions for the ASB's, MJD, etc etc etc. There is a lot of content you could just add to exploration and it would have been very fun. What sucks is repetition and too few sites. I would prefer more sites, even at less individual reward, but with much more variety. There are a lot of super hard non-rated sites that have crap loot though they are harder than some 10/10's though respectively lower rated. Some balancing of combat sites as some are WAY harder --- like neuting blood raiders are in some sites much harder than say many Angel sites (and certainly no corresponding increase in reward.) How about more escalation that you know...actually escalate. In null sec these come with some HUGE risk to run (well, at least in NPC null, I guess not in care bear null.) Would love to do more of those...but often not worth the squeeze.
All it needed was more content, new mods, make drones worth doing, and some new space...some cool uber dangerous.. unlivable WH space to explore.
Not a mini-game and a horrible, terrible, annoyingly bad twitch grab the can game.
|
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3430
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 19:46:00 -
[315] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:I say it again: Remove the pi+¦ata, remove the garbage, focus on the hacking game.
- nodes in the hacking game add a item from a specific loot table to the stash
- hacking the core allows you to release the stash or dig deeper into the system
- deeper levels have greater difficulty, depth of the system depends on the site/security/object
- failing in the hack locks the site, no rats, no explosions, just system lockdown
- failing the hack forfeits the stash, permadeath, a failure penalty you feel
- other players can boost the hacking player using a script on the hacking module
- can only activate one module on another player per ship
- allows taking turns with the hacking game without compromising the fit
- makes co-op more profitable as boosted hackers can go in deeper/open more items/finish the hack quicker
And this is just from the top of my head.
A cooperative hack could benefit from multiple human players by having a larger network with nodes that will expire once exposed. So it becomes a race against time. Multiple players would end up entering the network from distant locations, immediately increasing the chance that the control node for this level will be discovered before the time out.
I'm not sure what plans are in store, but having nodes which increase the expiry timer speed, slow it down, would make the game more tactical. Having some idea of what might be in the next node would be useful too, as would the ability for the player to drop firewalls of their own to block off other players, or scramblers to re-hide a node that had previously been exposed. This would turn into a competitive clicking contest, but at least the targets aren't moving, and interacting with the targets isn't overloading the "set a course in this direction" gesture for ship control.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
462
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 19:47:00 -
[316] - Quote
Just tried a hacking site. I don't want to judge after one short test, but I did not have the impression that personal skill is required or useful. I just click nodes and then find the system core or I find lots of firewalls. I always left firewalls alone until all other routes were exhausted, to find repair mods and other utility nodes first. That's about the only tactical possibility I can see so far, however. Rest appears to be blind luck.
Still, it's not too bad and an improvement over the non-game hacking was before.
The loot from that hisec site was laughable, but then I never got anything useful from a hisec site on TQ either, years back when I still did them.
The loot release mechanic is not too bad. Yes, for the record, I don't hate the loot release mechanic :p If my impressions are correct, it is not as twitchy as it first appears, because you can only grab one can every few seconds anyway (you click "take" when it's in range, then your ship uses a kind of shiny tractor beam and pulls the can in). Fast-clicking several cans in rapid succession did not seem to speed up the process, though I could be wrong about that.
All in all, collecting the loot requires a lot less fast reactions than doing pvp, so if you hate it so much, you're probably a goddamn carebear
Maybe a bug: Radial menu and also selected item menu for the loot cans does not have the "take" option, only right-clicking them works. That's weird and inconsistent, needs to change.
I had four hacking modules fitted, but it seemed that one module would have worked just as well, activating more than one on the can did not increase my virus strength. Is that confirmed?
What still bothers me is that those sites are best done in a super-cheap frigate, so no incentive to hunt down explorers in low/null/wh. Why don't you make the analyzer modules a lot more expensive, so they at least provide some value. T1 analyzer should be around 10m and T2 30-40m each (if you really need only one on a ship). . |
Wasilah
Big Diggers Trifectas Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:20:00 -
[317] - Quote
just wanted to update, the heron does add 10 to virus str so that part is working ok.
with that said i just wanna say really guys?
needless to say, i did not win that one.
edit: if you look in the centerish there is a utility there, i noticed that even though it's "hidden" because of the restoration node if you try and click on it all the restoration nodes will heal. |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
462
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:23:00 -
[318] - Quote
Lol. What was the name of the site, maybe "The Pentagon"? . |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1762
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:25:00 -
[319] - Quote
what if the container spewing thing would be the mechanic for a partially or fully failed hacking attempt instead of a fully successful hack.
if the game could be set up to have three endings: full success, partial success and failure, success would give you the full container, partial success the container spew scenario and failure nothing.
the full success scenario should be quite hard to achieve, and maybe easier to achieve if you bring friends (this would bring the multiplayer aspect back). eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Rob Crowley
State War Academy
59
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:33:00 -
[320] - Quote
Wasilah wrote:with that said i just wanna say really guys?needless to say, i did not win that one. Q: Why does the Antivirus have 360 coherency? A: Cause when you see it you turn 360-¦ and walk away.
Sorry, could not resist. |
|
Energetic Monk
Wayforward Emergent Technologies
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:39:00 -
[321] - Quote
After testing analyzing in a Cosmos site i will conclude that my decision to drop hacking/analyzing wasn't to hasty. Those that have stockpiled Cosmos stuff will soon be rewarded, since noone in their right mind will ever be doing a Cosmos site after a stint or two in a Cosmos site. |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
53
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:57:00 -
[322] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:Just tried a hacking site. I don't want to judge after one short test, but I did not have the impression that personal skill is required or useful. I just click nodes and then find the system core or I find lots of firewalls. I always left firewalls alone until all other routes were exhausted, to find repair mods and other utility nodes first. That's about the only tactical possibility I can see so far, however. Rest appears to be blind luck.
Thers definitely some tactical aspect to how it's now in nullsec sites. For instance if you open an antivirus node you have to find tools first and destroy it before you can think of finding and hacking the core. Gets worse if you happen to open two antivirus nodes. The "bad nodes" also seem to be more prevalent on nodes that are surrounded by other nodes so look careful and find a way around the outskirts. at least that's my tactic for now.
Quote:The loot release mechanic is not too bad. Yes, for the record, I don't hate the loot release mechanic :p If my impressions are correct, it is not as twitchy as it first appears, because you can only grab one can every few seconds anyway (you click "take" when it's in range, then your ship uses a kind of shiny tractor beam and pulls the can in). Fast-clicking several cans in rapid succession did not seem to speed up the process, though I could be wrong about that. All in all, collecting the loot requires a lot less fast reactions than doing pvp, so if you hate it so much, you're probably a goddamn carebear
I think you just randomly clicked cans. They have names that indicate possible good loot or crap. So while one can gets tractored you're busy hovering over the others to find the next good one just in time. It gets unnerving when the camera moves around, you're stuck in geometry or your ship overshoots the cans. Forget about checking dscan while doing this.
Quote:What still bothers me is that those sites are best done in a super-cheap frigate, so no incentive to hunt down explorers in low/null/wh. Why don't you make the analyzer modules a lot more expensive, so they at least provide some value. T1 analyzer should be around 10m and T2 30-40m each (if you really need only one on a ship).
Easy targets with possibly juicy loot in the cargo. The cap rig and faction pos bpc's should go for quite a sum. At least until the market has adjusted to the supply.
|
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
462
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 20:58:00 -
[323] - Quote
While objectively there is no difference between the normal loot luck factor we have now (what there is to find in a site) and what this new system brings (we can not get eveything, and the good stuff SURELY was in the cans I didn't get!!! *cry*), I think it might be wiser for CCP to change this. Most people can't stand the thought that they just "won" and still don't get everything. I foresee riots over this.Unjustified and dumb riots, but riots nonetheless.
edit
Johan Toralen wrote:~snip~
Good points, will look out for that next time I try. . |
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 21:12:00 -
[324] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:While objectively there is no difference between the normal loot luck factor we have now (what there is to find in a site) and what this new system brings (we can not get eveything, and the good stuff SURELY was in the cans I didn't get!!! *cry*), I think it might be wiser for CCP to change this. Most people can't stand the thought that they just "won" and still don't get everything. I foresee riots over this.Unjustified and dumb riots, but riots nonetheless.
Good points, will look out for that next time I try.
The problem is that the riots will be of CCP's making and very easily avoidable. That is the true shame of it. |
Wasilah
Big Diggers Trifectas Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 21:14:00 -
[325] - Quote
can we PLEASE for the love of god remove the mechanic that makes the site despawn if you leave it?!?!?!?!?!?!
had a cruiser spawn after a failed hacking attempt. I couldn't kill it in my heron and it couldn't kill me but rather than just tanking it i went to refit my ship for more dps and missed out on 80% of the site because it despawned. |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
462
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 21:26:00 -
[326] - Quote
Wasilah wrote:can we PLEASE for the love of god remove the mechanic that makes the site despawn if you leave it?!?!?!?!?!?!
had a cruiser spawn after a failed hacking attempt. I couldn't kill it in my heron and it couldn't kill me but rather than just tanking it i went to refit my ship for more dps and missed out on 80% of the site because it despawned. Funny, I was in the same situation today and expected the site to be gone when I came back with another ship, but it was still there. The previously spawned rat was gone, but not the containers.
Maybe you had already done all the containers in the site except one? Could be the site despawns when every container has been tinkered with and then everyone leaves the grid. Which wouldn't be so terrible.
. |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
54
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 21:32:00 -
[327] - Quote
NPC's will be removed. But that sure would suck if you warped to a safe spot in the middle of running the site.
Btw. can it be so that the containers despawn after been hacked? That would safe at least a hand full of clicks on these new sites. |
Wasilah
Big Diggers Trifectas Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 21:47:00 -
[328] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:Funny, I was in the same situation today and expected the site to be gone when I came back with another ship, but it was still there. The previously spawned rat was gone, but not the containers.
Maybe you had already done all the containers in the site except one? Could be the site despawns when every container has been tinkered with and then everyone leaves the grid. Which wouldn't be so terrible.
sadly it was the second fail attempt. first rat was a frig and the second one (that i was having issues killing) was a cruiser. I would get it to about half shields and it would just rep back up.
Also wanted to add that it seems the value's that the "heal" utilities seems to be a lot lower than it was before the patch yesterday. They are almost no help at all now where as before they would actually allow you to keep going past the 2 firewalls you can fight now. |
Atomic Option
Taggart Transdimensional Virtue of Selfishness
56
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 22:21:00 -
[329] - Quote
I just tried a couple of sites in Sansha null. Hacking skill is only level 3 so it was expectedly hard. Found a site in a WH but wasn't equipped to clear it.
Thoughts:
- Love the hacking minigame. Agree with others that it still has some filling out to do, but it definitely has lots of potential.
- Didn't find an Archeology to try, but short of coming up with a completely different mini-game (probably way out of scope) you could easily differentiate it by flavoring them differently. Make one movement, sequence, and puzzle based and leave the other tactical virus combat based. Not sure how hard it would be to dynamically generate genuinely challenging puzzles for the logic and movement based version. Giving them different looking UIs and naming the elements of the minigame differently would help too.
- Agree that loot vomit isn't fun or sensical. It was an interesting idea, but I tried it and didn't care for it. One thing that could make it less annoying would be to have the loot not go far enough to require the ship to move or let the tractor beam reach far enough to hit any of the loot before it despawns. That way people won't feel they MUST always use a nano'd frigate to explore. It'd still require precision d-clicking and friends to get everything but would remove some of the frantic panic of figuring out which group of suicidal fart particles to go after.
As a sociable alternative I liked the "multiple people concurrently hacking increases loot" ideas posted earlier as long as it doesn't make solo play too inferior. I prefer to do PVE solo about as often as with friends because there's less time commitment and it can be more spontaneous.
- Shouldn't be able to re-cloak while hacking module is active.
- As Wasilah said, sites despawning when you warp out doesn't make sense. It kinda ruins the immersion. The site should despawn after all the containers are hacked AND you warp out. Loot should despawn with the site to get rid of the behavior we see in current DED sites where you blap the leader, BM the wreck, warp out, site despawns, warp back and grab the loot unmolested.
|
M'aak'han
C-7
26
|
Posted - 2013.05.24 22:24:00 -
[330] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:NPC's will be removed. But that sure would suck if you warped to a safe spot in the middle of running the site.
Btw. can it be so that the containers despawn after been hacked? That would safe at least a hand full of clicks on these new sites.
Even solo, you can still form a fleet with yourself. This way, you can tag the containers you already dealt with. Tags will persist if you leave the grid, but not if you dock or change system unfortunately. But it saved me a lot of wasted time in the past nonetheless.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 20 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |