Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
servalaan
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 03:29:40 -
[151] - Quote
Does this need to be an out of ship experience? there has to be more to having a body than just walking to the couch in the station.
Anyways....I think Instead of two or more cans at a data/relic site there should be two or more access points to a single stash. Some access points 'could' lead to dead ends, so if your alone your free to try another access point, if you have company two or more players (depending on how many access points) could access the same site at the same time and it then becomes a race for the loot, if either player screws it up the whole place pops, the loot burns and nobody gets rich.
If pinocchio told you his nose was about to grow, what would happen?
|
Square PI
Hedion University Amarr Empire
17
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 14:15:34 -
[152] - Quote
Sorry for the little necro. But i got faction POS BPC from relic sites. Not so many, but still. Got a Serpentis Medium Tower just a week ago (in Hisec).
Still really rare, and maybe to rare to be good, but it is still possible to get these (or possible again after recent changes) |
|
CCP Bayesian
1264
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 11:20:56 -
[153] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Undocked with Astero to check the hacking change. Did one data in hisec. I think it a very good feature. It will help a lot with hardest can types. Especially in the end when only few nodes left. I've noticed i slow down the clickfest to check the numbers, it may be dangerous a bit for explorers in lower sec regions. CCP Bayesian wrote:Hopefully I'll be able to put out some more improvements as I get time to work on them. You have more of them? There was something with more than one system core.
Yeah I've implemented multiple cores as a prototype which works pretty nicely. The idea is to give people a little more finesse in balancing their own risk vs. reward by splitting the loot up between cores. I'm also looking at multiple levels so you'd go deeper into the systems for more special reward and as a kind of precursor to making it viable to hack in an offensive way which probably needs something a bit more complex. The biggest requirement for this sort of stuff is a feature to tie it into though.
In the meantime I'd like to put in some more utilities and defensive software to up the variation a bit more. I did actually add in a counter defensive software to the direction indicator and there are some obvious utilities to help out with that. We'll probably put these out as we get time.
EVE Software Engineer
Team Space Glitter
|
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
139
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 12:12:35 -
[154] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Yeah I've implemented multiple cores as a prototype which works pretty nicely. The idea is to give people a little more finesse in balancing their own risk vs. reward by splitting the loot up between cores. It maybe hard to balance. Too easy or too hard to find system core we want to hack.
CCP Bayesian wrote: I'm also looking at multiple levels so you'd go deeper into the systems for more special reward and as a kind of precursor to making it viable to hack in an offensive way which probably needs something a bit more complex. The biggest requirement for this sort of stuff is a feature to tie it into though. Some progressive difficulty levels maybe, system that is connected to defensive sentries. Now, the more of system cores hacked the fewer sentries go online etc. I like the idea of non loot containers that have some sort of purpose on grid, defesive or gate openers. There are 3 x,y,z containers in new sleeper site. It could be one 3 system core system or 3 levels hacking container. If grid could be compressed without changing difficulty it would be great, but i think it would be hard to scale.
CCP Bayesian wrote:In the meantime I'd like to put in some more utilities and defensive software to up the variation a bit more. I did actually add in a counter defensive software to the direction indicator and there are some obvious utilities to help out with that. We'll probably put these out as we get time. I don't know but it might be to helpfull with hardest cans. Direction indicator is a good thing, i've stopped midless clicking and started to watch grid carefully.
Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.
I am the night. I'm Bantam.
More exploration in exploration
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
64
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 13:32:53 -
[155] - Quote
I get the feeling this goes in the wrong direction now ... by making it more complex, you increase the time it takes to hack a can . There are already those sleeper caches for people who like 30min of puzzle solving. Others do it for the ISK ...
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
139
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 13:37:38 -
[156] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:I get the feeling this goes in the wrong direction now ... by making it more complex, you increase the time it takes to hack a can Ugh. There are already those sleeper caches for people who like 30min of puzzle solving. Others do it for the ISK ... Complex doen't necessary mean more time consuming. Also sleepers sites are rare, maybe as rare as ghost sites, you won't see them every jump.
Bacon tastes so much better when it's marinated in vegan tears.
I am the night. I'm Bantam.
More exploration in exploration
|
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1479
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 13:56:36 -
[157] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:I get the feeling this goes in the wrong direction now ... by making it more complex, you increase the time it takes to hack a can . There are already those sleeper caches for people who like 30min of puzzle solving. Others do it for the ISK ...
Literally the worst post I've seen today.
Complexity IS what makes eve (in general), and the hacking minigame, interesting.
I, for me, criticized a lot the hacking minigame in the past, but this change is directly a change in the right direction! And future changes like what is prototyped right now are indeed promising.
Basically, as long as when I loose a hack, I feel like its my fault, and not the RNG's fault, its fine for me :)
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking
|
Tzar Sinak
Mythic Heights
150
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 14:07:20 -
[158] - Quote
This is all very nice but there is one place hacking NEEDS to be implemented: Offline towers. I have always seen the hacking feature as a gateway to more interesting play in far more areas of EVE. The first place is offline towers: Successfully hacking the tower allows the hacker to unanchor the tower and all other tower items.
Now you have space based beach combers.
Hydrostatic Podcast First class listening of all things EVE
Nolen Cadmar Spreadsheets Make industrial life easier!
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1049
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 15:13:34 -
[159] - Quote
Tzar Sinak wrote:This is all very nice but there is one place hacking NEEDS to be implemented: Offline towers. I have always seen the hacking feature as a gateway to more interesting play in far more areas of EVE. The first place is offline towers: Successfully hacking the tower allows the hacker to unanchor the tower and all other tower items.
Now you have space based beach combers.
hacking as a raiding mechanic would be nice .. once POS forcefields are removed and POS become more spread out like little cities like 500km
- SMA's, silo's etc.. -moon arrays - make them seperate like a POCO where the moon goo is stored for collection
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists.
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
|
permion
Second Battlegroup Nerfed Alliance Go Away
13
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 20:42:44 -
[160] - Quote
I think the data/relic rigs that grant benefits to your virus need to be buffed and/or gives your character a starting utility.
Right now they're only useful in 1 or two edge cases. Compared to the mostly sure benefits of scan strength(at least in the players mind since they don't have any way of seeing where it wouldn't have mattered), and the less more universal benefit in the sense that they're still useful for combat scanning(scan strength/resolution). |
|
Quanah Comanche
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 20:51:10 -
[161] - Quote
permion wrote:I think the data/relic rigs that grant benefits to your virus need to be buffed and/or gives your character a starting utility.
Right now they're only useful in 1 or two edge cases. Compared to the mostly sure benefits of scan strength(at least in the players mind since they don't have any way of seeing where it wouldn't have mattered), and the less more universal benefit in the sense that they're still useful for combat scanning(scan strength/resolution).
Huh? What dose virus strength have to do with scanning?
|
Quanah Comanche
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.12 20:56:18 -
[162] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:I get the feeling this goes in the wrong direction now ... by making it more complex, you increase the time it takes to hack a can . There are already those sleeper caches for people who like 30min of puzzle solving. Others do it for the ISK ...
And the more isk, the harder it should be. Risk...reward you know all that.
Aren't you the one who advised not scanning WHs? Great idea to offer new explorers. |
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
64
|
Posted - 2014.12.13 08:04:06 -
[163] - Quote
Quanah Comanche wrote:Tipa Riot wrote:I get the feeling this goes in the wrong direction now ... by making it more complex, you increase the time it takes to hack a can . There are already those sleeper caches for people who like 30min of puzzle solving. Others do it for the ISK ... And the more isk, the harder it should be. Risk...reward you know all that. Aren't you the one who advised not scanning WHs? Great idea to offer new explorers. Yeah, it is like with every PvE activity in EvE, once it starts to get a "profession" an important factor is efficiency and ISK/h. Non-combat exploration as an income source imo is in a unique position, as it creates decent ISK with very low risk and by providing some fun gameplay at the same time. I'm looking forward to the changes (and I'm in a more positive mood about as I was when I wrote the comment ), and the new numbers are great, cause they support the hacking flow and the way of thinking.
But at the end of the day, all fun and romantic feelings put aside, PvE in EvE is there to raise the ISK you can burn elsewhere which is rated by ISK/h.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
63
|
Posted - 2014.12.13 15:10:40 -
[164] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Jeremiah Saken wrote:Undocked with Astero to check the hacking change. Did one data in hisec. I think it a very good feature. It will help a lot with hardest can types. Especially in the end when only few nodes left. I've noticed i slow down the clickfest to check the numbers, it may be dangerous a bit for explorers in lower sec regions. CCP Bayesian wrote:Hopefully I'll be able to put out some more improvements as I get time to work on them. You have more of them? There was something with more than one system core. Yeah I've implemented multiple cores as a prototype which works pretty nicely. The idea is to give people a little more finesse in balancing their own risk vs. reward by splitting the loot up between cores. I'm also looking at multiple levels so you'd go deeper into the systems for more special reward and as a kind of precursor to making it viable to hack in an offensive way which probably needs something a bit more complex. The biggest requirement for this sort of stuff is a feature to tie it into though. In the meantime I'd like to put in some more utilities and defensive software to up the variation a bit more. I did actually add in a counter defensive software to the direction indicator and there are some obvious utilities to help out with that. We'll probably put these out as we get time.
Have you guys looked at a version of the game where players take a defensive role? In other words this as a form of pvp.
It would have to be tied into some other game mechanic, but the idea of two fleets fighting it out while two people play space chess to out hack each other is entertaining to me. |
Quintessen
Messengers of Judah Socius Inter Nos
464
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 16:25:46 -
[165] - Quote
Can we at least get the sites to de-spawn after there is no more loot. I've been to multiple sites where there are only empty cans remaining. Still un-hacked, but empty. |
Orlacc
668
|
Posted - 2014.12.16 18:09:35 -
[166] - Quote
Quintessen wrote:Can we at least get the sites to de-spawn after there is no more loot. I've been to multiple sites where there are only empty cans remaining. Still un-hacked, but empty.
They do despawn
"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
|
Varyah
I am Forever of the Stars
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.18 12:50:37 -
[167] - Quote
I find most aspects of the current system rather silly in the sense that the depiction of "hacking" is something you can do ad hoc with some fancy graphical interface starting with zero knowledge and tools, similar to the often even more silly depictions in movies and TV shows. Especially when you have some computer science or programming background you would expect something different.
I accept that it should be something like a minigame. Just activating your module and waiting for the loot to appear is kind of boring and too similar to mining.
But first I would appreciate a smaller/resizable interface.
Second I would envision "hacking" more like a tower defense minigame: Lets say we salvage the current layout of the minigame but you start with some tools instead of discovering good stuff (as a hacker you don't hack a computer and find suddenly on that computer a program that you can use to shut down the antivirus software, you bring that yourself). The amount and power of these tools depends on skills and skilllevels and/or modules.
- For example you start with two port scanners, a rootkit (use to make one of your tools invisible) and a few different types of viruses/malware (insert fancy names for them).
- You place these tools like towers in discovered areas (nodes in the current layout), you start on one side of the "map".
- Port scanners unveil nodes one by one each round automatically.
- If the port scanner is detected, i.e. gameplay: You unveil a node with a defense system, this defense system sends out "minions" (defense routines) to attack your port scanners.
- Now you place your fancily named malware in the right place to spawn your own "minions" (attack routines) to overwhelm the defense system.
- Essentially you have to choose the right malware to attack specific types of defense systems and/or find the weak spot in the defense so that your "minions" reach the opposite side of the "map".
- Add optional goals (total annihilation / destroy all of certain type of defense system / don't lose any of your systems / win without using the rootkit / etc.) for additional loot in the cans.
|
Jenshae Chiroptera
The Volition Cult
832
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 19:00:20 -
[168] - Quote
CCP Bayesian wrote:Vol Arm'OOO wrote:Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:I kind of like it. Its a nice blend of character skill and actual skill. Just saying. You sir are completely out of your mind. There is no actual skill involved. It is simply a button click fest. Actually, I take that back. There is some player skill involved. Pressing that button faster and faster is a kinda a player skill. We actually have an AI we use for testing which does a lot more than clicking quickly and doesn't cheat. I'm not going to say there is a huge skill ceiling but there certainly is one particularly in the harder systems. I've not yet seen a guide online that hits all the points we use. Granted they get the majority of really meaningful things correct and Hacking in hostile space is a bit different to a computer crunching. I actually quite like the idea of remaking the AI to be used in EVE, dumbing it down a bit and slowing it up so people can choose to fit an Auto-Hacking module. You'd be less successful overall but it'd be nice for people who don't want to Hack themselves. I also think there is a lot of room for giving high skill level Hackers something else to do. Totally supported. The auto hack would also keep you in one spot longer, open to attack, I hope.
CSM Ten movement for change.
CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids.
Status: Rabid carebear
Blog
|
d026
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 21:10:05 -
[169] - Quote
i utterely dislike the new hacking system. its a horrible klickfest, please implement the automated hacker II's. or just make the module how it was before. the minigame does not add anything to the game except frustration. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
933
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 21:29:17 -
[170] - Quote
yeah auto hacker 2 should have a 3 minute cycle time though and you can't move while it's on |
|
Orlacc
755
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 22:09:23 -
[171] - Quote
How about not messing with exploration any more for a spell?
"Measure Twice, Cut Once."
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
111
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 22:57:43 -
[172] - Quote
Oh my goodness, "auto-hacker" modules are the dumbest thing I've read in a while ... what's wrong with the minigame? If you can't beat it, get better! If it's not challenging enough, why bother?
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Garreth Arji
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 23:10:00 -
[173] - Quote
I have to agree that the mini-game is not cool. A lot of people undertook hacking and exploration as a semi-passive income when we had to do other things like study or work simultaneously saving our miniscule active game time for PVP & fun. This can;t be done anymore as CCP makes the game more and more against people having any passive income. This is a game that I got into because it was too complex for most warcraft folks to come to, and also allowed passive income generation to spend active time having fun in PVP. Both of those selling points for me are gone now.
It's a choice between 3 options and none of them are appealing to me.
1 - Leave EVE alltogether, stop paying money to them and in turn abandon all my friends I made in this game I used to love.
2 - Continue playing EVE, paying a sub, yet never feeling that I get any value out of it because all my time goes into making isk and moving assets around to prepare for PVP I never get to take part in.
3 - Continue playing and paying, forget PVP and fun, and simply have a social environment that allows practice making spreadsheets and playing markets.
Sadly, I go with option 3 because there is nothing else, but this eve is not the eve that captured my attention, drew me in, and captivated me for the darkest years of my life. That old eve got me through some tough stuff IRL and now it is not the thing I grew to love anymore |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
46687
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 23:19:17 -
[174] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Oh my goodness, "auto-hacker" modules are the dumbest thing I've read in a while ... what's wrong with the minigame? If you can't beat it, get better! If it's not challenging enough, why bother? I'll tell you what's wrong with the mini-game.
First of all it's a damn click-fest.
Secondly it takes up way too much area on the screen.
Thirdly it takes too long to complete.
Fourth, there's more 'Risk' involved than there is 'Reward'.
Fifth, cargo scanners allow players to 'Meta-game' the sites.
In my opinion that makes them worthless. Definitely not exploration but more like traps to lure in easy victims.
And yes I have max skills with top of the line equipment.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
933
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 23:35:00 -
[175] - Quote
make them immune to cargo scanners :D |
Garreth Arji
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.01.29 23:50:19 -
[176] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:make them immune to cargo scanners :D
I'd rather make the small amount of active gaming time I have immune to wasteful time sinks. Exploration was always meant to be an income source, not content in and of itself until this mini-game came into existence. That only happened because they spend so much time looking for ways to increase monetization that the game has become more about subscriber revenue than about the game. I feel betrayed as a bitter vet. I left before and gave away all my original accounts and assets, yes regretfully I will add. However, coming back to the game because of social interaction, old friends, some family who still play, etc. has brought me back into a game that I find more malice for than love.
I'm not the only person that sees this either. The only way I know how to explain this is that it feels like an active campaign against my time and the only way to fight it is to be rich and pay more IRL $ to this company in an attempt to get the same level of service that used to be available without the extra time, money and effort. Effectively, the ability to extract fun from this game has been squandered for the sake of higher numbers next to that $ symbol in their accounting department. |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
213
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 09:42:54 -
[177] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:First of all it's a damn click-fest.
They add new mechanism to hacking few patches ago. Now we have bigger impact where do we want to go on grid. Reduced clicking a lot. As for improving whole thing CCP Bayesian had some aces in the sleeve, not all features were implemented at day 1 as far as i know. It's fine imo, if i can hack +15 devices/cans in sleeper cache and don't vomit it's good.
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Totally supported. The auto hack would also keep you in one spot longer, open to attack, I hope I think it would be good option for those who don't want to hack actively. I can hack a can in 15-20 sec, 3 min is enough for passive activity. Chance based ofc.
About cargo scanning, i think i will change side and vote for no removing it.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
d026
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 10:45:34 -
[178] - Quote
Tipa Riot wrote:Oh my goodness, "auto-hacker" modules are the dumbest thing I've read in a while ... what's wrong with the minigame? If you can't beat it, get better! If it's not challenging enough, why bother?
hacking is not hard.. but its boring because you have to klick an average of 50 nodes! |
d026
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 10:51:21 -
[179] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:First of all it's a damn click-fest.
They add new mechanism to hacking few patches ago. Now we have bigger impact where do we want to go on grid. Reduced clicking a lot. As for improving whole thing CCP Bayesian had some aces in the sleeve, not all features were implemented at day 1 as far as i know. It's fine imo, if i can hack +15 devices/cans in sleeper cache and don't vomit it's good. Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:Totally supported. The auto hack would also keep you in one spot longer, open to attack, I hope I think it would be good option for those who don't want to hack actively. I can hack a can in 15-20 sec, 3 min is enough for passive activity. Chance based ofc. About cargo scanning, i think i will change side and vote for no removing it.
3 minutes is hilarious. a hacking attempt should take no longer than maybe 15 seconds! |
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
213
|
Posted - 2015.01.30 13:17:20 -
[180] - Quote
d026 wrote:3 minutes is hilarious. a hacking attempt should take no longer than maybe 15 seconds! Faster than manual scanning, and maybe with 100% chance of succes? No. You must put and effort into activity to get a candy.
"...genre is a definition, the definition in itself must have boundaries, the boundaries act as barriers, and the barriers are like walls, like the walls of a prisonn++..."
The Good, The Bad and The Bantam
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |