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) |
Tsubutai
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
206
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 11:51:00 -
[151] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Stuff thatGÇÖs in development and relevant to feedback posted in this thread:
[list=1]
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. I think this is going to present a significant balance issue. As it stands on SiSi, the T1 exploration frigates are the only ships that provide a bonus to virus strength and are thus arguably the best ships for doing these sites in, especially since the NPCs are being removed entirely. If the rewards per site are also being doubled, that means you'll be able to farm quite valuable loot in throwaway ships.
|
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1183
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:17:00 -
[152] - Quote
Sylvia Nardieu wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:
- 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.
So basically, the penalty for failure will be same loot in more containers making it harder to catch em all before they despawn? Or was it a typo and you meant that less loot will be scattered?
Pretty sure he means the same amount of loot, but more containers, which means more junk containers.
Rob Crowley wrote: This is not just a problem regarding player progression and sense of achievement, but also you're currently encouraging people to run those sites in low/nullsec with a cheap T1 frig instead of a shiny expensive toy because the T1 frig is actually better at it. But surely you must want PvEers to bring their T3s and similar stuff (and risk/lose them in the process).
This is a good point. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
461
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:21:00 -
[153] - Quote
Indeed. Risk vs. reward has in fact three factors. One is the reward, but the risk it split between two factors: The probability that you lose something and the value of what you can lose.
If you stand a 5% chance to lose your ship but the ship is worth 2 billion, that is quite a big risk. If you have a chance of 50% to lose your ship but the ship's worth is only 1 million, that is a very small risk. . |
Jommis
CRICE Corporation Insidious Associates
72
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:25:00 -
[154] - Quote
Hello CCP peeps.
I just did a mag site in 0.0 Lots of cans got shot into space when i opened the cans.
My question is as follows.
Are they supposed to despawn after 20-30 seconds? I'm in my shiny tengu and have no chance to check them before they despawn.
And is it possible to get the cans on the overview? |
Saheed Cha'chris'ra
Krautz WH Exploration and Production
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:29:00 -
[155] - Quote
Jommis wrote: Are they supposed to despawn after 20-30 seconds? I'm in my shiny tengu and have no chance to check them before they despawn.
And is it possible to get the cans on the overview?
They are supposed to do so. The containers are "drifting away" until they disappear. Thats because CCP endorses you to bring along some of your friends, so everyone can click the cans to tractorbeam them.
Also: Seeing the cans in the overview would be nice, but then it would be easy to see the names of the cans and get the high-value-ones first... |
|
CCP Soundwave
C C P C C P Alliance
2515
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 12:51:00 -
[156] - Quote
Sylvia Nardieu wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:
- 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.
So basically, the penalty for failure will be same loot in more containers making it harder to catch em all before they despawn? Or was it a typo and you meant that less loot will be scattered?
Same loot, more containers |
|
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:03:00 -
[157] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Morning update post! Changes that will hit Sisi later today:
- The 0.0 sites are now complete and ready to be run. That means weGÇÖre done rejigging the sites and anything not working in terms of GÇ£interior designGÇ¥ should be submitted as a bug report.
- The performance issues with clouds should be taken care of as well. If itGÇÖs not, poke us in this thread, but the site changes deployed later should fix them.
- We are cutting the number of scatter containers in half, while retaining the total loot of a hacking/arch object. This should effectively double your income.
Stuff thatGÇÖs in development and relevant to feedback posted in this thread:
- 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.
- WeGÇÖre looking into the scatter container brackets. Anything from increasing size, changing their icons depending on loot category etc is on the board, to make them easier to interact with.
- Sleeper sites will not have their NPCs removed.
WeGÇÖll be in the thread monitoring all day. Thanks for the feedback.
so basically the actual formula is definitive?
|
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:03:00 -
[158] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote: [list=1]
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.
This sounds like a good idea on paper. What's problematic about the way it's implemented is that you have hurt all-in-one exploration, thereby limited the possibilities for explorers. Explorers now have to chose between doing profession sites or combat sites to run either efficiently, especialy below hisec. That's due to ban of T3 from 4/10 and the new mods taking up slots. For profession ships its gonna be necessary to fit the right rigs, some probe mods to run them efficiently, so no room for tank and dps. Combat exploration Ishtar has no room for probe mods, hacking rigs, has no bonusses anyway and can't fit cov cloak. Pilgrim is too weak and has no bonuses and extra slots aswell.
So if you insist on the T3 ban you should consider a new ship class for all in one exploration. Could be a buffed Pilgrim with bonus to virus strenght and probing, two extra med slots for probe mods, one more low slot for better tank and a bit more cpu. Sounds pretty hardcore, eh? I guess it could be balanced by hardcoding that 4 of the midslots must be used for analyzers and probe mods and nothing else. (or how about these modules already being built in like a true exploration ship?)
Or you make a new ship based on the Gnosis model in that fashion with the bpc's spawning in exploration sites. These ships would be quite expensive i suppose so risk/reward isnt hurt as much as running sites in frigs.
|
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:09:00 -
[159] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote: [list=1]
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. This sounds like a good idea on paper. What's problematic about the way it's implemented is that you have hurt all-in-one exploration, thereby limited the possibilities for explorers. Explorers now have to chose between doing profession sites or combat sites to run either efficiently, especialy below hisec. That's due to ban of T3 from 4/10 and the new mods taking up slots. For profession ships its gonna be necessary to fit the right rigs, some probe mods to run them efficiently, so no room for tank and dps. Combat exploration Ishtar has no room for probe mods, hacking rigs, has no bonusses anyway and can't fit cov cloak. Pilgrim is too weak and has no bonuses and extra slots aswell. So if you insist on the T3 ban you should consider a new ship class for all in one exploration. Could be a buffed Pilgrim with bonus to virus strenght and probing, two extra med slots for probe mods, one more low slot for better tank and a bit more cpu. Sounds pretty hardcore, eh? I guess it could be balanced by hardcoding that 4 of the midslots must be used for analyzers and probe mods and nothing else. (or how about these modules already being built in like a true exploration ship?) Or you make a new ship based on the Gnosis model in that fashion with the bpc's spawning in exploration sites. These ships would be quite expensive i suppose so risk/reward isnt hurt as much as running sites in frigs.
why would you need a new ship when the actual covert ops can run those site just fine? They are cheap, cloaked and fast. If they remove the npc from those site there will be no reason to stick with another ship. |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:12:00 -
[160] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:why would you need a new ship when the actual covert ops can run those site just fine? They are cheap, cloaked and fast. If they remove the npc from those site there will be no reason to stick with another ship.
You completely missed the point which is all-in-one exploration (profession sites+combat sites in the same ship).
|
|
Noonxo
Federal Organization for Outerspace Freedom Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:15:00 -
[161] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:why would you need a new ship when the actual covert ops can run those site just fine? They are cheap, cloaked and fast. If they remove the npc from those site there will be no reason to stick with another ship.
In a CovOps any kind of fail that spawns even a NPC frigate prevents you from staying there and continue hacking.
Edit: I actually tried and you can fit a Small shield booster if you add at least 1 Co-proc, though you can't fit the 3 Scanning Upgrades + both Analyzers doing that. (tested on a Buzzard) |
Saheed Cha'chris'ra
Krautz WH Exploration and Production
39
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:19:00 -
[162] - Quote
Noonxo wrote: In a CovOps any kind of fail that spawns even a NPC frigate prevents you from staying there and continue hacking.
There won't spawn any NPCs if you fail hacking. Soundwave made it clear one page back ;) No NPCs in data/relic-sites in K-Space.
But yeah, if you want to do all-in-one-exploration, maybe you have to think about new fittings and ships in the future. I am excited to see what kind of new ships CCP plans for the progression tree of exploration. |
Rek Seven
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
712
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:20:00 -
[163] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:I want to correct a slight misunderstanding. This was a miscommunication between me and Soundwave about the NPC removal and I apologize for not spotting this earlier.
NPCs are not being removed from wormhole sites.
We are only removing NPCs from "normal" k-space hacking and archaeology signatures (NPCs will only spawn in those sites when you fail at the challenge). No changes are being made to NPCs in wormholes or COSMOS or other hacking/archaeology sites.
The reason for the removal is to allow explorers to play the game without having a combat ship on standby.
That's kind of disappointing. It could have been a good change if you did it right...
Is my bitter vet membership card in the mail? |
Noonxo
Federal Organization for Outerspace Freedom Fatal Ascension
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:20:00 -
[164] - Quote
Ho my bad I missed that line I just read the "added containers" part :D I was still thinking of my experience from yesterday where a ****** T1 frigate kicked my ass off a Site |
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:23:00 -
[165] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:why would you need a new ship when the actual covert ops can run those site just fine? They are cheap, cloaked and fast. If they remove the npc from those site there will be no reason to stick with another ship. You completely missed the point which is all-in-one exploration (profession sites+combat sites in the same ship).
you can use any ship atm, with the scanning modules ishater, vagabond etc etc will have no problem to do high sec or low sec esploration |
Saheed Cha'chris'ra
Krautz WH Exploration and Production
40
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:27:00 -
[166] - Quote
Noonxo wrote:Ho my bad I missed that line I just read the "added containers" part :D I was still thinking of my experience from yesterday where a ****** T1 frigate kicked my ass off a Site
Off Topic: This Forum needs an "SHOW ALL DEV POSTS IN THIS THREAD" Button. Would make a lot things easier |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:30:00 -
[167] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:you can use any ship atm with the new scanning modules ishtar, vagabond pilgrim..... will have no problem to do high sec exploration both combat and and data/relic. For harder sites there are the t3
Was thinking more about low sec. Sure you can fit the mods on every ship. But think about efficiency for a second. You end up with ships that can do everything but are good at nothing. And show me where you fit the new mods on an all in one exploration T3 or put hacking rigs on there. |
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:38:00 -
[168] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:you can use any ship atm with the new scanning modules ishtar, vagabond pilgrim..... will have no problem to do high sec exploration both combat and and data/relic. For harder sites there are the t3 Was thinking more about low sec. Sure you can fit the mods on every ship. But think about efficiency for a second. You end up with ships that can do everything but are good at nothing. And show me where you fit the new mods on an all in one exploration T3 or put hacking rigs on there.
hacking rigs? really?
[Tengu, Esplorazione] Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding Tengu Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
6x Heavy Missile Launcher II (Scourge Fury Heavy Missile) Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner 2x Pith B-Type EM Ward Field Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Shield Boost Amplifier II Analyzer II
3x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
2x Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
ok that is the one i use and doesn't need any new mods to probe i have in cargo codebreaker II, salvager II, sba, covert ops cloak and covert subsystem. and can easly run every 0.0 site from magneto to 10/10 |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:43:00 -
[169] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:hacking rigs? really?
CCP mentioned bonuses to virus strenghts so i would assume they will be a good addition to run profession sites efficiently.
Quote:[Tengu, Esplorazione] Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding Tengu Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
6x Heavy Missile Launcher II (Scourge Fury Heavy Missile) Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner 2x Pith B-Type EM Ward Field Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Shield Boost Amplifier II Analyzer II
3x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
2x Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
ok that is the one i use, i have in cargo codebreaker II, salvager II, sba, covert ops cloak and covert subsystem. and can easly run every 0.0 site from magneto to 10/10
That's not a all-in-one fit.
|
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:51:00 -
[170] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:hacking rigs? really? CCP mentioned bonuses to virus strenghts so i would assume they will be a good addition to run profession sites efficiently. Quote:[Tengu, Esplorazione] Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding Tengu Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir
6x Heavy Missile Launcher II (Scourge Fury Heavy Missile) Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher
Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner 2x Pith B-Type EM Ward Field Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Shield Boost Amplifier II Analyzer II
3x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System
2x Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
ok that is the one i use, i have in cargo codebreaker II, salvager II, sba, covert ops cloak and covert subsystem. and can easly run every 0.0 site from magneto to 10/10 That's not a all-in-one fit.
Hacking sites are already easy without rigs So you want a ship with 6 mid slots, covert, and with bonus to drones? Exploration is already easy let's make it even easier. |
|
Mario delTorres
GBTeam C0VEN
8
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 13:55:00 -
[171] - Quote
OK. I counted it. I found guristas haking site in low sec.
One of the data containters has only 1 decryptor screen
When I hacked it 20 small containers spawned in random directions. screen
Decryptor is inside one of them then you have only 5% chance for catch it.
5% chance! WOW! but ONLY if you successfully hack minigame in every time!
If success of hacking minigame is 70% then you chance for catch valuable item is 3,5% WOW and WOW again! I have to buy a lot of decryptors because with this chance all prices will rise a lot!
|
EvilweaselSA
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
828
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:02:00 -
[172] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:you can use any ship atm with the new scanning modules ishtar, vagabond pilgrim..... will have no problem to do high sec exploration both combat and and data/relic. For harder sites there are the t3 Was thinking more about low sec. Sure you can fit the mods on every ship. But think about efficiency for a second. You end up with ships that can do everything but are good at nothing. And show me where you fit the new mods on an all in one exploration T3 or put hacking rigs on there. exactly as it should be, there shouldn't be a Single Correct Exploration Fit |
Johan Toralen
Clockwork X3
35
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:14:00 -
[173] - Quote
Seth Asthereun wrote:Hacking sites are already easy without rigs So you want a ship with 6 mid slots, covert, and with bonus to drones? Exploration is already easy let's make it even easier. Refitting from time to time doesn't seem to be such a burden
How can you say this? The hacking isn't even finished yet. Ther's probably gonna be some sites that will be more tricky as the sites right now. I lost a bunch of containers on sisi due to failing the hacking game aswell. Obviously the concept of efficiency is foreign to you.
Also i'm talking about a ship like all-in-one Ishtar or Pilgrim that take the new changes and mechanics into account and you react by posting your pimped mission fit. How is that even relevant? People play Eve differently. Hard to grasp. Good for you that you can run 10/10 in your boat. I don't have access to non NPC stations in nullsec to switch fits and why would that even be considered normal for a true exploration ship? And i don't even talk about a boat that would be capable of soloing higher class combat sites unlike your ship so what's the problem? You don't like other people sniffing around on your turf in a cloaky ship, that's it, isn't it? |
Killua Zoldyeck
Jump Zero
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:16:00 -
[174] - Quote
CCP Tallest wrote:I want to correct a slight misunderstanding. This was a miscommunication between me and Soundwave about the NPC removal and I apologize for not spotting this earlier.
NPCs are not being removed from wormhole sites.
We are only removing NPCs from "normal" k-space hacking and archaeology signatures (NPCs will only spawn in those sites when you fail at the challenge). No changes are being made to NPCs in wormholes or COSMOS or other hacking/archaeology sites.
The reason for the removal is to allow explorers to play the game without having a combat ship on standby.
Then can you please remove the NPC that spawns if you fail the minigame too? Because if I fail, I need that combat ship on standby to deal with it...
|
Saheed Cha'chris'ra
Krautz WH Exploration and Production
42
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:18:00 -
[175] - Quote
Killua Zoldyeck wrote: Then can you please remove the NPC that spawns if you fail the minigame too? Because if I fail, I need that combat ship on standby to deal with it...
they will be removed in the next "SiSi Patch". Soundwave (or another Dev) said so two pages back. Dont worry.
CCP Soundwave wrote: 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.
|
Killua Zoldyeck
Jump Zero
3
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:19:00 -
[176] - Quote
Saheed Cha'chris'ra wrote:Killua Zoldyeck wrote: Then can you please remove the NPC that spawns if you fail the minigame too? Because if I fail, I need that combat ship on standby to deal with it...
they will be removed in the next "SiSi Patch". Soundwave (or another Dev) said so two pages back. Dont worry.
Yes my bad :) I posted my reply before taking the time to read the whole topic :) :) |
Lilan Kahn
The Littlest Hobos Whores in space
143
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:32:00 -
[177] - Quote
loot pintas are still not fun, did 18 hi sec sites, got around 12m isk of loot. |
Seth Asthereun
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 14:35:00 -
[178] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Seth Asthereun wrote:Hacking sites are already easy without rigs So you want a ship with 6 mid slots, covert, and with bonus to drones? Exploration is already easy let's make it even easier. Refitting from time to time doesn't seem to be such a burden How can you say this? The hacking isn't even finished yet. Ther's probably gonna be some sites that will be more tricky as the sites right now. I lost a bunch of containers on sisi due to failing the hacking game aswell. Obviously the concept of efficiency is foreign to you. Also i'm talking about a ship like all-in-one Ishtar or Pilgrim that take the new changes and mechanics into account and you react by posting your pimped mission fit. How is that even relevant? People play Eve differently. Hard to grasp. Good for you that you can run 10/10 in your boat. I don't have access to non NPC stations in nullsec to switch fits and why would that even be considered normal for a true exploration ship? And i don't even talk about a boat that would be capable of soloing higher class combat sites unlike your ship so what's the problem? You don't like other people sniffing around on your turf in a cloaky ship, that's it, isn't it?
I'm talking about what is hacking atm, i can't and you can't know what it will be, you are talking to me of efficiency and you can't figure out how to fit and all in one ship. you can already do it with the ishtar, no you won't be able to fit your beloved rigs and won't be covert. But as someone as written before "there shouldn't be a Single Correct Exploration Fit" and there souldn't be a "final" exploration ship that can do everything efficiently. That will just make exploration more easy than it already is And btw i probe in providence and low sec so there are already a lot of "other people sniffing around on you turf in a cloaky ship" the solution i come to was to specialize (as it should be in everything) not ask CCP a ship that allows me to do everything |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Aegis Solaris
1880
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 15:05:00 -
[179] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Sylvia Nardieu wrote:CCP Soundwave wrote:
- 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.
So basically, the penalty for failure will be same loot in more containers making it harder to catch em all before they despawn? Or was it a typo and you meant that less loot will be scattered? Same loot, more containers Another way to handle failure is to increase the speed the containers move once they have been released. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Kor'el Izia
52
|
Posted - 2013.05.23 15:17:00 -
[180] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:
We are cutting the number of scatter containers in half, while retaining the total loot of a hacking/arch object. This should effectively double your income. [/list]
If by double you mean having the same as we do today, what one person can take. |
|
|
|
|
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 |