Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 85 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12955
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:14:50 -
[1] - Quote
Hello everyone! As we announced first at Fanfest, we are running a test server playtest of the new sovereignty capture system so that players can get a chance to try it out before it hits TQ, and so that we can get lots of testing to prevent bugs and issues before they reach the live server.
We accepted signups via EVEMail for a few months, and we've now sent response EVEMails to all the interested alliance executors to give them all the details. If your alliance signed up to participate, poke your executors and make sure they've checked their EVEMails.
Current expected schedule is for the server to open up for people to start preparing sometime this weekend, and for the competition to begin next week, Tuesday at the earliest.
This will also serve as a general purpose thread for questions and comments about the Duality playtest.
Alliances that have signed up (with their starting constellations):
- Affirmative. (04-H4M)
- Brave Collective (G2E-RJ)
- Darkness. (ZQ2-CF)
- Fidelas Constans (I9B-8X)
- I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth (Q-6LG1)
- Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork (H-KW4A)
- Nemesis Enterprises (FDR-EQ)
- No Not Believing (AZBG-H)
- Pandemic Legion (HS7W-T)
- Praetorian Directorate (NNLX-K)
- Q Alliance-á(UD-ZJ3)
- Spectre Fleet (XV7L-S)
- Stella Nova (P6N8-J)
- Suddenly Spaceships (5-88B9)
Spectre Fleet will be forming an alliance on Duality and has asked us to let people know that they will be accepting characters into their alliance. So if you are interested in joining this test but aren't a member of a participating alliance feel free to give them a shout.
Quote:Rules:All rules and dates are subject to change. The primary purpose of this event is testing of new Sovereignty features. CCP staff reserves the right to penalize or disqualify alliances if they act in a manner which interferes with the goal of testing. The server simulation is taken as is, and we guarantee no reimbursement or compensation for any losses on Duality. The server may go down unexpectedly, and in extreme cases there may be database resets required. It's a test server running fresh features so a bunch of **** is probably going to break, make peace with that reality. The Duality server is expected to open up for you all this weekend (approximately June 12th), with the competition beginning early next week (approximately June 15th) and ending on July 6th. These dates are all subject to change, but if we do change them we'll give you as much notice as possible. A mass test will likely take place at some point during this time period, which may disrupt the competition temporarily. Alliances are welcome to accept members on Duality even if those players aren't members on TQ. If you would like CCP to help advertise your Duality recruitment for this playtest, let us know and weGÇÖll help as much as we can. We do not currently plan on restricting access to the Duality server during this competition, so pilots who are not involved with any of the competing alliance are welcome to show up and interact with the ongoing competition. This competition will take place in the entirety of Providence and three constellations in Catch (NNLX-K, T-HHHT, and FDR-EQ). Players are not restricted to this area and are welcome to use nearby areas for movement and to base in nearby NPC stations to launch counterinvasions if they lose their space. However be aware that outside of the competition zones server performance will likely be significantly poorer. Important: There will be some characters on the Duality server with the tag "PTW" in their name, as well as ISD bug hunters and CCP characters. These are QA professionals working on systematically testing the new features. They will generally be in completely different regions than the playtest, but if you do encounter them you are not allowed to shoot them or otherwise interfere with them. If you Entosis their **** we'll smite you with the banhammer. Each alliance will begin the competition with sovereignty over one constellation (assigned by CCP) in the competition area. Any remaining constellations will be claimed by a set of neutral placeholder alliances. The neutral placeholder alliances will not make any serious efforts to defend their space during this playtest (I may or may not show up in a Maulus to mess with you). Each system will begin the competition with a TCU and an IHUB, and most systems have stations (because Providence). The objective of the competition is to have as many of the three core sovereignty structures (TCU, IHUB, Station) belonging to your alliance online in the competition area as possible at the time when the competition ends. Alliances are welcome to make agreements with each other, support each other, and generally scheme however they want. Each TCU, IHUB and Station in the competition area will be worth one point. The prizes (more details below) include special honour for the alliance with the most points, as well as some prizes that are drawn randomly with each point providing the alliance with one "ticket" to the draw. This means that even if you do not expect to be able to come 1st it is still worthwhile to hold as many systems as possible by the end of the competition. Each constellation will have a market seeded system, and players are welcome to bring their own equipment from the TQ mirror as well. Please bug report any issues you find, and if you find a clear exploit please report it and then refrain from abusing it. Prizes:The names of every alliance that participates in this testing event (by capturing at least one system within the competition area) will be listed in the description of the Entosis Link I blueprint, in order from the highest points to lowest points. The identity of the first place alliance will be incorporated prominently into the lore surrounding the Entosis Link. We will also be naming four meta variations of the Entosis Link after four of the alliances in this playtest. The meta naming alliances will be drawn in a raffle, with each point counting as one raffle ticket for that alliance. Of the four randomly selected alliances, we will first allow the one with the highest point value to choose which meta variation they prefer to bear their name, and then the next highest and so on. For instance, if I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth get drawn in the raffle, people could be looting the blueprint for the "J4LP Modified Compact Entosis Link" for decades to come. Thank you all very much for participating in this playtest, and we hope you'll have a great time...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12955
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:15:02 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
609
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:15:19 -
[3] - Quote
Reserved
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
609
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 19:25:14 -
[4] - Quote
Reserved
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 20:55:44 -
[5] - Quote
I don't know if anyone else is having this issue but when I attempt to log onto Duality I am being prompted that my account has been disabled. Is this a known problem or am I not doing something right. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12955
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:05:19 -
[6] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:I don't know if anyone else is having this issue but when I attempt to log onto Duality I am being prompted that my account has been disabled. Is this a known problem or am I not doing something right.
I've reactivated you. For anyone else with the same problem, post in this thread.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems
148
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:13:31 -
[7] - Quote
For curiosities sake. If a alliance that didn't sign up for the play test were to take systems, would they be added to the listing? And how would that be handled? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12955
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:42:02 -
[8] - Quote
Onslaughtor wrote:For curiosities sake. If a alliance that didn't sign up for the play test were to take systems, would they be added to the listing? And how would that be handled? I can't make any promises, but if you take space in the competition zone we'll try to incorporate you into the lore somehow if possible.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12955
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:44:08 -
[9] - Quote
Since this build doesn't allow station capture yet and station services can only be repaired by the station owning alliance, we've transferred the stations in the seeded systems to their respective alliances. The rest of the structures will be set up for you all right before we start the competition.
No Not Believing and Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork alliances both closed on this mirror, so you'll need to reform your alliances before we start the competition.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:46:39 -
[10] - Quote
Found a pretty critical bug on duality - can I pm someone?
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
609
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 21:56:39 -
[11] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Found a pretty critical bug on duality - can I pm someone?
(assuming I can't use normal petition route as it is Duality...) You can send me a mail if you wish, but the best strategy would be to report the bug in client (F12 -> Report Bug), or failing that, through our website: https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports/
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 22:22:16 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Found a pretty critical bug on duality - can I pm someone?
(assuming I can't use normal petition route as it is Duality...) You can send me a mail if you wish, but the best strategy would be to report the bug in client (F12 -> Report Bug), or failing that, through our website: https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports/ I've submitted it through the client, didn't realise it logs automatically - neat feature.
Quite an amusing 'bug' (if it is one - might just be me, will try logging in tomorrow); would cause all sorts of fun and mayhem on TQ....
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Blue Ice
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 23:08:19 -
[13] - Quote
Please seed Deadspace/faction items.
Most importantly - armor hardeners, eanms, shield hardeners, remote reppers, points, webs, prop mods, weapon upgrades. |
Feetzor
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.15 23:33:04 -
[14] - Quote
Agreed please seed Deadspace/faction items. And remove at least some of the special edition ships from the market, seeing full fleets of them would be bad! Many doctrines are designed around deadspace/faction and may not fit using t2 modules. |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2521
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 03:37:55 -
[15] - Quote
im gonna make a wild geuss and assume /boostsov is disabled as well |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:17:14 -
[16] - Quote
Bug report I
https://gist.github.com/kiu/4ee1060a0174d6915343 |
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
421
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 04:36:28 -
[17] - Quote
Please DONT seed deadspace/faction. It's ridiculous enough as it is with limited issue ships like etanas/cambions/whiptails and HG pirate sets but what's done is done. Might as well keep whatever's left of the resemblance to the real server intact |
|
CCP Habakuk
C C P C C P Alliance
1357
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 08:28:30 -
[18] - Quote
Rowells wrote:im gonna make a wild geuss and assume /boostsov is disabled as well
Your wild guess is correct. No magical sov boost, except at the start of the test by us.
CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Gridlock
Bug reporting | Mass Testing
|
|
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 09:24:50 -
[19] - Quote
Blue Ice wrote:Please seed Deadspace/faction items.
Most importantly - armor hardeners, eanms, shield hardeners, remote reppers, points, webs, prop mods, weapon upgrades.
No.
Stay poor. |
|
CCP Habakuk
C C P C C P Alliance
1357
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 10:18:08 -
[20] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:CCP Lebowski wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Found a pretty critical bug on duality - can I pm someone?
(assuming I can't use normal petition route as it is Duality...) You can send me a mail if you wish, but the best strategy would be to report the bug in client (F12 -> Report Bug), or failing that, through our website: https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports/ I've submitted it through the client, didn't realise it logs automatically - neat feature. Quite an amusing 'bug' (if it is one - might just be me, will try logging in tomorrow); would cause all sorts of fun and mayhem on TQ....
Thank you for your report. It seems like you managed to find a very rare edge-case with ships containing drones, which are several years old. I assume that this would also be reproducible on Singularity.
CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Gridlock
Bug reporting | Mass Testing
|
|
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:41:18 -
[21] - Quote
Just to be clear you will set up sov structures? You dont want us to drop TCU's and IHub's? And the current Duality sov constellation will populate the Alliance sov window before the test starts? |
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:43:16 -
[22] - Quote
Also... as Dotlan won't show the sov ownership and changes, obviously, how can we follow whats happening and also know what is friendly or not territory once the test starts? |
Alan Artemisa
The Dysfunctionals Fidelas Constans
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:51:10 -
[23] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:Also... as Dotlan won't show the sov ownership and changes, obviously, how can we follow whats happening and also know what is friendly or not territory once the test starts?
Lots and lots of scouting I assume. I decided to take a look at the API to see if Duality has an API, but unfortunately it doesn't look like it does, otherwise some crafty person could probably make an auto-updated map of the battlezone. |
Agent Unknown
Night Theifs incendia equus
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 12:54:05 -
[24] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:Also... as Dotlan won't show the sov ownership and changes, obviously, how can we follow whats happening and also know what is friendly or not territory once the test starts?
There's a sov dashboard that will be available on Duality that tells you everything you need to know. There's a couple devblogs detailing that.
As far as I know, Duality doesn't expose API data like Singularity does, but that could change if CCP wants developers to start making changes to their apps (like dotlan). |
Lauresh Thellere
Discipuli Diaboli Test Alliance Please Ignore
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 15:21:07 -
[25] - Quote
Hi Fozzie can I please get magicked into Affirmative. |
SilverBack Rotineque
Thrall Nation Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 15:45:37 -
[26] - Quote
7o,
Having trouble logging into Duality. I followed all the instructions and can get the client open (http://imgur.com/s8Kiw65). I type in my login information and the character screen doesn't pop up. I noticed that after typing in my login information, a bar that says checking status (http://imgur.com/LhtI2hS) pops up next to the login info where it usually says the server, status, and number of players, but it never goes to the character screen. I wait for a bit, then click login again and this (http://imgur.com/My1bA1W) pops up telling me I need to close and restart the client. I have tried clearing my settings, cache, starting from the launcher, deleting the folder and reinstalling Duality, nothing has worked. Is there anything else I can do to get logged in?
Thanks, Silverback |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
309
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 16:58:09 -
[27] - Quote
I must admit I'm not a fan of how the market is. Constantly having alliance tournament ship, faction fit pirate battleships and 100 ISK triage carriers dropping on me left and right doesn't exactly feel realistic. Toss in everyone rocking high grade pirate implants...
*sigh*
No way to curb it down a bit before the thing starts?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:09:06 -
[28] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Constantly having alliance tournament ship, faction fit pirate battleships and 100 ISK triage carriers dropping on me left and right doesn't exactly feel realistic. No way to curb it down a bit before the thing starts?
I think this just levels the playing field a bit. Even if it were real ISK market values, entities like BL could still do the same thing (as they likely have almost unlimited funds) while all the younger alliances participating in the event don't have a huge wallet to begin with.
You can already see how people throw their Titans on field - which should be a very limited resource - not caring about losses because they got enough of them.
A proper test would have been, remove all assets from everyone, give every player x amount of isk, set all prices to a fixed value, disable isk generation (insurance, bounties, etc) and get everyone started.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:11:09 -
[29] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I must admit I'm not a fan of how the market is. Constantly having alliance tournament ship, faction fit pirate battleships and 100 ISK triage carriers dropping on me left and right doesn't exactly feel realistic. Toss in everyone rocking high grade pirate implants...
*sigh*
No way to curb it down a bit before the thing starts?
IDK but it feels pretty normal for PL fleets. We are having to downgrade our fits compared to main server and it makes me feal like a scrub |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
609
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:11:50 -
[30] - Quote
SilverBack Rotineque wrote:7o,
Having trouble logging into Duality. I followed all the instructions and can get the client open (http://imgur.com/s8Kiw65). I type in my login information and the character screen doesn't pop up. I noticed that after typing in my login information, a bar that says checking status (http://imgur.com/LhtI2hS) pops up next to the login info where it usually says the server, status, and number of players, but it never goes to the character screen. I wait for a bit, then click login again and this (http://imgur.com/My1bA1W) pops up telling me I need to close and restart the client. I have tried clearing my settings, cache, starting from the launcher, deleting the folder and reinstalling Duality, nothing has worked. Is there anything else I can do to get logged in?
Thanks, Silverback Thanks for reporting this Silverback,
Unfortunately I'm not sure what to suggest as you seem to tried all the normal options for troubleshooting such an issue. Id ask you to make sure you are manually deleting the relevant cache files from your appdata folder (Normally found here: C:\Users\USERNAME\AppData\Local\CCP\EVE)
If this still does not work, please use CTRL+ALT+M to bring up the engine tools window, select log viewer and save the current logs. Then go to our online bug reporting tool (https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports) and report a bug, providing as much information as you can and attaching that log file.
Hope this helps!
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12959
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:29:20 -
[31] - Quote
After some internal discussion, we have decided not to seed faction or deadspace items on Duality. We are completely aware that 100isk ships and modules (including rare ships and pirate implants) lead to different fleet metas than what would be seen on TQ, but that's acceptable for the purposes of this test. However to expand the seeding list further would just move things further away from TQ combat rather then closer so we're going to avoid changing that for now.
Rowells wrote:also when is the expected end date? We're currently expecting to end the competition on July 6th.
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:Just to be clear you will set up sov structures? You dont want us to drop TCU's and IHub's? You're free to drop your own TCUs and IHubs and to fight each other before the competition starts, but you don't need to. We'll be setting up all the structures in your constellation before we start the official event.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12959
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:32:27 -
[32] - Quote
We're pushing back the expected start date of the competition one day to Thursday June 18th.
To help accelerate the early testing and make up for the lost days we plan to set the reinforcement length on TCUs, IHUBs and Stations to one day (rather than the two days that are planned for the final design) for at least the first four days of testing.
In the meantime we will leave Duality open with its current QA settings for the structures (two minute capture times, one hour reinforcement periods) so that players can freely explore the basics of the system without needing to wait.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 17:42:00 -
[33] - Quote
Maybe my earlier post got ignored as it was a link.
Bug report / Feedback
IHUB IHUB is not recognized as being in 9uy. It is there in space, belongs to brave holdings, but the UI insists on that another IHUB can be deployed. When you try to deploy another ihub, you get a message that there is already an IHUB. Enemies can actually entosis the IHUB, but after repairing that, the IHUB is still not recognized.
Station management The button for station management in the Offices list, sometimes doesnt show up. Need to redock to see that button.
Command Nodes Command Nodes do not show up on DSCAN or Probe Scan even though the devblog says otherwise.
Move HQ Could not move our HQ due to: "SEC regards the location you are in as being part of a territorial dispute. SEC rulesforbid HQs of corporations being created in or relocated to disputed territories. Due to this you can not move your HQ here." Even though we own the station and have a TCU in 9uy. Guess this is coupled to outdated SOV mechanics?
iHub Ownership When we placed and entosist an iHub, it got registered as being owned by the Exec Corp even though the person doing the Entosis is not part of the exec corp, he is member of a different alliance corp. Is this intentional? Can we transfer ihub ownerships somehow?
TCU We had a TCU and iHub at Planet I in 9uy (the one with the broken ihub). The TCU was fully functional and claimed BRAVE. I passed by and scooped it into my cargo. Why was I able to scoop it even though I am not int he owning Exec Corp? That did nothing to the system, it was still claimed to BRAVE. There was no notification about TCU loss. Then I tried to deploy it again at the exact same location and got an error (I believe notAPlanet?). Once downtime hit, the system got marked as unclaimed. I moved to a different planet, and there I could deploy it without a problem.
Vulnerability Window Not sure where the option is hidden to configure the vulnerability window? Or where we can define a system being the Designated Capital System?
Steam Is there an option for Steam users to get on Duality?
TCU II Even though a systen is unclaimed (no active TCU), the UI (upper left corner) and Solarsystem Show Info shows a vuln window for the TCU.
TCU III Redeployed the previously scooped TCU and entosist it. No notification. And for me the system was marked as unclaimed (for others it correctly switched to being claimed as brave). This fixed itself once I did a session change. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
309
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:01:16 -
[34] - Quote
Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I must admit I'm not a fan of how the market is. Constantly having alliance tournament ship, faction fit pirate battleships and 100 ISK triage carriers dropping on me left and right doesn't exactly feel realistic. Toss in everyone rocking high grade pirate implants...
*sigh*
No way to curb it down a bit before the thing starts? IDK but it feels pretty normal for PL fleets. We are having to downgrade our fits compared to main server and it makes me feal like a scrub I get that. I'm not asking for some fair fight. I just want the obvious dumb stuff addressed. Alliance tournament ships seeded needs to be gone. Self destructing capitals to avoid jump fatigue going back to base. Maybe these things won't be abused come Thursday? You and I both know they will. lol
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2521
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 18:43:24 -
[35] - Quote
If you're looking for factions mods, you might have some luck raiding what is left in the major hubs for sale. You'll need isk (I suggest self-destructing capitals) as the price is copied from TQ.
And in regards to the indexes again: Will they remain at the static level or will they degrade? And I'm not entirely sure how they work once dove is transferred, so will the index hold, or will the final days of the test be at pretty much sov 0 for all systems? |
Milai Isagar
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 19:43:51 -
[36] - Quote
Will we need to keep the indicies up and can we increase them during the test? or are they set for the duration? Also... i'm assuming when we get control of our stations properly we will have enough offices for corps for the obvious corp hangar reasons :)
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:07:50 -
[37] - Quote
CCP Habakuk wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:CCP Lebowski wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Found a pretty critical bug on duality - can I pm someone?
(assuming I can't use normal petition route as it is Duality...) You can send me a mail if you wish, but the best strategy would be to report the bug in client (F12 -> Report Bug), or failing that, through our website: https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports/ I've submitted it through the client, didn't realise it logs automatically - neat feature. Quite an amusing 'bug' (if it is one - might just be me, will try logging in tomorrow); would cause all sorts of fun and mayhem on TQ.... Thank you for your report. It seems like you managed to find a very rare edge-case with ships containing drones, which are several years old. I assume that this would also be reproducible on Singularity. Heh, well, I guess if you're going to break something, have a proper crack at it...
Thanks for the hint, I can confirm removing all the drone-containing ships resolved the problem \o/
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
AARC
The Dutch East India Company Fidelas Constans
12
|
Posted - 2015.06.16 20:57:07 -
[38] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:Maybe my earlier post got ignored as it was a link.
Bug report / Feedback
IHUB IHUB is not recognized as being in 9uy. It is there in space, belongs to brave holdings, but the UI insists on that another IHUB can be deployed. When you try to deploy another ihub, you get a message that there is already an IHUB. Enemies can actually entosis the IHUB, but after repairing that, the IHUB is still not recognized.
Station management The button for station management in the Offices list, sometimes doesnt show up. Need to redock to see that button.
Command Nodes Command Nodes do not show up on DSCAN or Probe Scan even though the devblog says otherwise.
Move HQ Could not move our HQ due to: "SEC regards the location you are in as being part of a territorial dispute. SEC rulesforbid HQs of corporations being created in or relocated to disputed territories. Due to this you can not move your HQ here." Even though we own the station and have a TCU in 9uy. Guess this is coupled to outdated SOV mechanics?
iHub Ownership When we placed and entosist an iHub, it got registered as being owned by the Exec Corp even though the person doing the Entosis is not part of the exec corp, he is member of a different alliance corp. Is this intentional? Can we transfer ihub ownerships somehow?
TCU We had a TCU and iHub at Planet I in 9uy (the one with the broken ihub). The TCU was fully functional and claimed BRAVE. I passed by and scooped it into my cargo. Why was I able to scoop it even though I am not int he owning Exec Corp? That did nothing to the system, it was still claimed to BRAVE. There was no notification about TCU loss. Then I tried to deploy it again at the exact same location and got an error (I believe notAPlanet?). Once downtime hit, the system got marked as unclaimed. I moved to a different planet, and there I could deploy it without a problem.
Vulnerability Window Not sure where the option is hidden to configure the vulnerability window? Or where we can define a system being the Designated Capital System?
Steam Is there an option for Steam users to get on Duality?
TCU II Even though a systen is unclaimed (no active TCU), the UI (upper left corner) and Solarsystem Show Info shows a vuln window for the TCU.
TCU III Redeployed the previously scooped TCU and entosist it. No notification. And for me the system was marked as unclaimed (for others it correctly switched to being claimed as brave). This fixed itself once I did a session change.
HQ can never be moved to a system that can be take over by another alliance, Only locations you can move your corporate HQ to are stations in high-sec, low-sec and NPC null-sec. (NPC Null-sec because those stations cannot be conquered.) |
Blue Ice
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:19:17 -
[39] - Quote
please name command nodes A B C D etc.
e.g. 9UY4-H Station Command Node A
or any way to differentiate them. |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 00:21:21 -
[40] - Quote
Blue Ice wrote:please name command nodes A B C D etc.
e.g. 9UY4-H Station Command Node A
or any way to differentiate them.
Or fix them so they show up on the probe results (see above in my bugreport) so they have a unique ID. |
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 06:22:45 -
[41] - Quote
Blue Ice wrote:please name command nodes A B C D etc.
e.g. 9UY4-H Station Command Node A
or any way to differentiate them.
+1 without specific command node names there won't be much of a way to coordinate a multi layered attack or defense, which defeats the purpose of creating a multi-front battlefield, if you don't know what front you are fighting on how are you supposed to fight |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
609
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 12:38:26 -
[42] - Quote
Thanks for the feedback so far everyone, let me try and answer a bunch of the questions brought up so far
kiu Nakamura wrote:IHUB IHUB is not recognized as being in 9uy. It is there in space, belongs to brave holdings, but the UI insists on that another IHUB can be deployed. When you try to deploy another ihub, you get a message that there is already an IHUB. Enemies can actually entosis the IHUB, but after repairing that, the IHUB is still not recognized. This is now fixed.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Station management The button for station management in the Offices list, sometimes doesnt show up. Need to redock to see that button. I haven't been able to reproduce this issue myself, if you see it again could you please submit a bug report in client (F12->Report Bug) and I'll investigate further.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Command Nodes Command Nodes do not show up on DSCAN or Probe Scan even though the devblog says otherwise. This will be resolved for dscan, adding this to the known issues.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Move HQ Could not move our HQ due to: "SEC regards the location you are in as being part of a territorial dispute. SEC rulesforbid HQs of corporations being created in or relocated to disputed territories. Due to this you can not move your HQ here." Even though we own the station and have a TCU in 9uy. Guess this is coupled to outdated SOV mechanics? This is correct, you've never been able to move your corporate HQ to a location you could get locked out of for obvious reasons
kiu Nakamura wrote:iHub Ownership When we placed and entosist an iHub, it got registered as being owned by the Exec Corp even though the person doing the Entosis is not part of the exec corp, he is member of a different alliance corp. Is this intentional? Can we transfer ihub ownerships somehow? This is by design. All structures will initially be owned by the executor corp, who will be able to transfer to any corp within the alliance. The functionality for this is still being worked on.
kiu Nakamura wrote:TCU We had a TCU and iHub at Planet I in 9uy (the one with the broken ihub). The TCU was fully functional and claimed BRAVE. I passed by and scooped it into my cargo. Why was I able to scoop it even though I am not int he owning Exec Corp? That did nothing to the system, it was still claimed to BRAVE. There was no notification about TCU loss. Then I tried to deploy it again at the exact same location and got an error (I believe notAPlanet?). Once downtime hit, the system got marked as unclaimed. I moved to a different planet, and there I could deploy it without a problem. Scooping should never have been possible by anyone, this was corrected in yesterdays build.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Vulnerability Window Not sure where the option is hidden to configure the vulnerability window? Or where we can define a system being the Designated Capital System? Both are configured in the Home Sub tab of the Alliance tab in the Corporation window. (Expand the settled systems section to see the options for capital system assignment).
kiu Nakamura wrote:Steam Is there an option for Steam users to get on Duality? I'm unsure about this actually, sorry! I'll be investigating this today and will hopefully return with more info.
kiu Nakamura wrote:TCU II Even though a systen is unclaimed (no active TCU), the UI (upper left corner) and Solarsystem Show Info shows a vuln window for the TCU. The system info panel has had some bugs with updating correctly, these should all be resolved now, but the data on vulnerability is currently faked and will be replaced with real data soon.
kiu Nakamura wrote:TCU III Redeployed the previously scooped TCU and entosist it. No notification. And for me the system was marked as unclaimed (for others it correctly switched to being claimed as brave). This fixed itself once I did a session change. As above, this should be fixed now.
Blue Ice wrote:please name command nodes A B C D etc.
e.g. 9UY4-H Station Command Node A
or any way to differentiate them. Yep unique names are part of our design and will be coming soon!
Milai Isagar wrote:Will we need to keep the indicies up and can we increase them during the test? or are they set for the duration? Also... i'm assuming when we get control of our stations properly we will have enough offices for corps for the obvious corp hangar reasons :)
The indexes will be initially set, but we don't have a way to keep them fixed sadly, so they will decay if not kept up.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:40:18 -
[43] - Quote
Thanks for the extensive reply.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Station managementThe button for station management in the Offices list, sometimes doesnt show up. Need to redock to see that button. CCP Lebowski wrote: I haven't been able to reproduce this issue myself, if you see it again could you please submit a bug report in client (F12->Report Bug) and I'll investigate further.
Bug report sent on Duality. May be related to waking up after being podded.
kiu Nakamura wrote:Command NodesCommand Nodes do not show up on DSCAN or Probe Scan even though the devblog says otherwise. CCP Lebowski wrote: This will be resolved for dscan, adding this to the known issues.
What about Probe Scans as mentioned in the devblog? I would have guessed each one gets its own ID in there and can be identified that way?
CCP Lebowski wrote:This is correct, you've never been able to move your corporate HQ to a location you could get locked out of for obvious reasons
I am so bad at this game, lol.
|
Taurkinius
FCON Aerarium Militare Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 13:59:53 -
[44] - Quote
With today's build moving the sov panel for a system into the system's info screen, the ability to check the sov indexes, ownership, and other useful information at the constellation and regional levels have been removed. We still need the sov panel available for information at constellation and regional level. |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 14:16:53 -
[45] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:Vulnerability WindowNot sure where the option is hidden to configure the vulnerability window? Or where we can define a system being the Designated Capital System? CCP Lebowski wrote: Both are configured in the Home Sub tab of the Alliance tab in the Corporation window. (Expand the settled systems section to see the options for capital system assignment).
The Designated Capital UI seems to be buggy, see https://community.eveonline.com/support/bug-reports/my-bug-reports/details?issueId=EBR-39925
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
24
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 14:19:28 -
[46] - Quote
Taurkinius wrote:This is rather inefficient from an alliance leadership standpoint, as being able to view all of my alliance's sov indices at a glance is going to be a large part of how we work in the new sov system.
Also it is important to get a glance of enemies indices as well :)
But I assume, once there is an API endpoint to extract this data, everyone will look it up on Dotlan or their own alliance tools amyway.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2526
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:08:43 -
[47] - Quote
The entosis link has a tendency to lag a bit and start a new cycle when it shouldn't. It's usually off by a second or two between the timer and cycle time. You can turn off the modules before hand to get it to stop on time and the node still dies. |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
25
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:15:51 -
[48] - Quote
I assume this hasn't been enabled yet, but shouldn't our designated capital system have an adjusted Defense Multiplier (not 1.0)?
And shouldn't the Sovereignity Tab on Show Info indicate somewhere that this is a capital?
|
Lauresh Thellere
Discipuli Diaboli Test Alliance Please Ignore
50
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 15:33:07 -
[49] - Quote
I had a couple of suggestions for the new sov ui, it's a pretty UI and gives the basic information but trying to get more advanced details can be a bit painful.
One way it's a pain is the new structure timer UI is gorgeous and it shows the name and logo of the alliance who owns them but there's no way of pulling up structure or alliance info from that. It would be nice if there was an info button that links to the alliance info page. I'd also love to see information on what structure upgrades are installed such as i-hub upgrades on the i-hub timer page.
Another way is that it seems to be hard to find a list of sov that the alliance owns, I'd love to see a soverignty tab in the alliance info page that lists all the systems that particular alliance owns. |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
610
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 17:51:34 -
[50] - Quote
Taurkinius wrote:With today's build moving the sov panel for a system into the system's info screen, the ability to check the sov indexes, ownership, and other useful information at the constellation and regional levels have been removed. We still need the sov panel available for information at constellation and regional level.
Edit:
I see in the alliance screen there is now a Sov panel that only shows sov info for my own alliance, however it does not display the indices unless I hover over the "Bonus" button, one system at a time. This is rather inefficient from an alliance leadership standpoint, as being able to view all of my alliance's sov indices at a glance is going to be a large part of how we work in the new sov system. Providing this data in a simplistic form that I can see immediately and can swiftly scroll through without having to look system by system would be VERY helpful as an alliance leader. Maybe some small dots or something else easily understood but not taking up large swaths of UI space. This is a fair point and we've been discussing it in Five 0 today. As of now we're undecided whether this will be something we address in the initial release, in a later iteration, or leave it to be something exposed through CREST that others can address themselves in their alliance tools. This may depend on how quickly we can get the more vital aspects of the UI to a working state, so stay tuned and we'll update you when we know more.
Thanks for the excellent bug report, its nice to be able to just assign straight to a developer without having to rewrite the whole thing for sanity, top work!
Rowells wrote:The entosis link has a tendency to lag a bit and start a new cycle when it shouldn't. It's usually off by a second or two between the timer and cycle time. You can turn off the modules before hand to get it to stop on time and the node still dies. We're aware of this and are working on a solution.
kiu Nakamura wrote:I assume this hasn't been enabled yet, but shouldn't our designated capital system have an adjusted Defense Multiplier (not 1.0)? And shouldn't the Sovereignity Tab on Show Info indicate somewhere that this is a capital? EDIT Ahhh...the icon in the upper left corner has a star for being a capital. Shouldnt the show info do the same thing then as it uses the same icon (I understand that this might be difficult due to coding limitations): http://i.imgur.com/MstOWh3.png The backend functionality is not in place yet, so this won't be affecting your Activity Defense Bonus just yet. That's a good point about the show info window though I'll pass it on to the relevant Dev.
Lauresh Thellere wrote:I had a couple of suggestions for the new sov ui, it's a pretty UI and gives the basic information but trying to get more advanced details can be a bit painful.
One way it's a pain is the new structure timer UI is gorgeous and it shows the name and logo of the alliance who owns them but there's no way of pulling up structure or alliance info from that. It would be nice if there was an info button that links to the alliance info page. I'd also love to see information on what structure upgrades are installed such as i-hub upgrades on the i-hub timer page.
Another way is that it seems to be hard to find a list of sov that the alliance owns, I'd love to see a sovereignty tab in the alliance info page that lists all the systems that particular alliance owns. Some good point in here that we'll be considering as we iterate on the UI.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
610
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 17:55:58 -
[51] - Quote
Oh, just so everyone's aware, I'm ending all capture campaigns that are more than a day old as many may be quite buggy now.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
26
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:21:55 -
[52] - Quote
CCP Lebowski wrote:This is a fair point and we've been discussing it in Five 0 today. As of now we're undecided whether this will be something we address in the initial release, in a later iteration, or leave it to be something exposed through CREST that others can address themselves in their alliance tools.
Please, make this a release blocker. Think of the emergent gameplay not happening. If there is no mechanism whatsoever (have a CREST endpoint and you are good to go), there will be the need for recon teams to burn their time, collecting this data manually on a regular basis. Don't hurt them even more :)
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
610
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 18:34:37 -
[53] - Quote
Sorry I should have been clearer, at the very least it will be exposed through CREST
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Angelic Tallbrooke
Redemption Road Affirmative.
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.17 23:42:35 -
[54] - Quote
I would like to say that the Affirmative. Alliance would also be more than happy to have any players not currently in an alliance taking part joining us on Duality! We are an NPSI community, so if Spectre doesn't poach all of the newbros to Sov first, we'll gladly take applications to Redemption Road on the server for the games. :D |
Saeka Tyr
Sanctuary of Shadows Triumvirate.
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 00:28:16 -
[55] - Quote
Could the beacons be fixed?
Right now cynos, drone sites, jove observatories, and now entosis things share the same overview beacon. This can result in a very crowded overview.
Could the npc/sov/player beacons be broken up? Ideally the entosis beacons would be put into the anomaly window, which solves the naming convention issue and retains some value of consistency between the new sov mechanic and faction warfare. Inconsistent UI is sucky.
Also, would it be possible to make the node and beacon the same thing? You warp to the beacon and you are presented with two things to sovwand, and the beacon itself takes 3 minutes to lock in a marauder so there'll be a bit of confusion as people figure out what needs to be sovwanded.
The overall sov UI needs a bit more clarity. I see a red and blue, or maybe black, circle. I have no idea what this means, other htan something is either getting bigger or smaller. There is no visibility (as far as I can see) as to who owns the red bar, or the blue bar.
Something more clear to measure the status of a system would be very helpful.
On that point, when you get into the system info there is the sov tab. I love the sov tab. But a few points on that:
- A constellation level overview would be great.
- You open the tab and a 2 hour timer starts ticking, with the current time. This means absolutely nothing and appears broken.
- It'd be nice if you could show info on the "sovereign alliance".
Also, there's currently no notifications when the command nodes are being hit as far as I can see. This is major, or a very interesting design choice.
Can I also assume all of this stuff will be exported via API? Overall I really like the new system. It just needs refinement and better UI. |
Dreadis Akiga
Praetorian Guard of Honour Praetorian Directorate
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:11:28 -
[56] - Quote
I seem to have a problem trying to get onto Duality. I did as the blog says, copied everything to new files. I start the launcher, and it starts to update itself, fails the first time, retry and it updates, then goes to create patch, and sticks there. Left it for over 2 hours, nothing. So I deleted the second files, recopied, and the exact same thing happened.
Any help would be appreciated, want to get in on the games, lol. |
Shimozu Shinta
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 01:12:16 -
[57] - Quote
There've been a number of times where I've started a warmup cycle on my entosis on a station service, and the service goes immediately red once the second cycle starts. It's always the second service I attempt to offline (first one works just fine) and sometimes happens on the third as well. Currently have a T2 entosis Gnosis just screwing around where nobody is in system. I'm not a part of any participating alliance and just testing the module as an "honorable third party."
TNT Alliance Tournament XII Team Captain
Worst. Goalie. Ever.
|
Shimozu Shinta
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 03:45:33 -
[58] - Quote
Interesting thing: Right before downtime, a BRAVE person and myself were in a fleet together. He has T1 link, I T2. He started on a node, and I started it later. When my link started, the timer seemed to go faster (2 min timer vs 5 min timer.) How should the timers work in this situation?
TNT Alliance Tournament XII Team Captain
Worst. Goalie. Ever. - Fanfest 2015
|
Shimozu Shinta
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 05:07:38 -
[59] - Quote
One last thing: In the sovereignty map, for systems with Structure Sovereignty Status items that are contested, I see the current time and a two-hour countdown next to it. For instance, when first typing this I see: "TCU Contested 05:00 (-01:58:45)"
A few minutes later it read: "TCU Contested 05:06 (-01:59:42)"
Also, how should we expect to see the progress bars change while capturing various nodes?
TNT Alliance Tournament XII Team Captain
Worst. Goalie. Ever. - Fanfest 2015
|
Saeka Tyr
Sanctuary of Shadows Triumvirate.
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 06:04:09 -
[60] - Quote
Regarding the TCU/IHUB items, could you remove pointless stats from their attributes page?
For example, since they can no longer be unanchored or scooped, could we get the unanchor/online/anchoring delay attributes removed? That way it is clear that these are more permanent structures.
Also, the deployment distances need to be looked at as they serve no purpose.
You physically can't drop two ihubs anymore: "05:55:11NotifyThere can only be 1 Infrastructure Hub deployed in the system", so get rid of the "other ihub" distance.
Finally, shooting an ihub gives this message. In nullsec.
Quote:Aggression against this peaceful entity may have consequences such as a standings penalty or returned aggression. It is recommended that you reconsider.
Do you wish to proceed?
I think we can all agree that this has literally no meaning and can be removed. |
|
Venix
An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE
14
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 07:44:46 -
[61] - Quote
How long do you have to capture the system for in order to be added to the list? |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
445
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 09:19:49 -
[62] - Quote
Whenever you capture a station, the notification always states it was captured by the executor corp of the alliance, instead of the corporation of the pilot(s) that were actually capturing the nodes.
Sometimes, the Entosis Link II will go into another cycle when the command node is destroyed within 2-5 seconds of the end of the link's cycle.
I miss seeing the name of the owning alliance across the top left of the screen by the system name. Was always nice to be able to tell at a glance who's space you are in while roaming. Now, you have to hover to discover that. (Hopefully this is just a result of testing code, and not a change in design).
Edit: Forgot to mention, the wording of the hover-over boxes regarding invulnerability is misleading. When you hover over the icon for stations, for example, it says, "Station Invulnerability 12:00-16:00" - I believe you mean Vulnerability, since it is actually vulnerable between 12:00-16:00 :)
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 11:04:58 -
[63] - Quote
did we get an answer of station offices? we can't run the corps logistics, indy and pvp functions without access to corp hangars
not without most of us pulling our hair out at least |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 13:25:30 -
[64] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:did we get an answer of station offices? we can't run the corps logistics, indy and pvp functions without access to corp hangars not without most of us pulling our hair out at least
I cleared out a bunch of station slots for you in K1Y.
If anyone needs some offices opened up in their constellation just post in this thread letting us know which station and I'll get you sorted asap.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 13:55:01 -
[65] - Quote
We're still on course to start the competition today, but it may be a bit later in the evening before we can take the server out of VIP. We'll keep you posted.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 15:12:24 -
[66] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:did we get an answer of station offices? we can't run the corps logistics, indy and pvp functions without access to corp hangars not without most of us pulling our hair out at least I cleared out a bunch of station slots for you in K1Y. If anyone needs some offices opened up in their constellation just post in this thread letting us know which station and I'll get you sorted asap.
awesome... could we have a few offices cleared in all the stations in the constellation please>
O-Y5JQ N-RMSH IWZ3-C DNR-7M JEIV-E
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 15:40:13 -
[67] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:did we get an answer of station offices? we can't run the corps logistics, indy and pvp functions without access to corp hangars not without most of us pulling our hair out at least I cleared out a bunch of station slots for you in K1Y. If anyone needs some offices opened up in their constellation just post in this thread letting us know which station and I'll get you sorted asap. awesome... could we have a few offices cleared in all the stations in the constellation please> O-Y5JQ N-RMSH IWZ3-C DNR-7M JEIV-E Done
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:01:57 -
[68] - Quote
We could use some slots in our home system as well , IS- . |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:13:03 -
[69] - Quote
CoffinBait wrote:We could use some slots in our home system as well , IS- . Done
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:14:22 -
[70] - Quote
We're definitely not going to be ready right at 18:00, work is ongoing and we'll get the server up as soon as we can.
Also please refrain from logging on while the server is in VIP if you have old access from last year's AT prep. I'm kicking people off and revoking their roles when we see them on during this period.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Mitnik
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:30:34 -
[71] - Quote
7o,
Im having issues telling which alliance is currently winning the node war. I see the colored circle, but i dont see a way to show who is doing what. Am i a scrub and not seeing the correct place, or will such a thing be implemented in the future? |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:32:29 -
[72] - Quote
Mitnik wrote:7o,
Im having issues telling which alliance is currently winning the node war. I see the colored circle, but i dont see a way to show who is doing what. Am i a scrub and not seeing the correct place, or will such a thing be implemented in the future?
Blue is defending Red is Attacking. |
Mitnik
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:41:22 -
[73] - Quote
Tappits wrote:
Blue is defending Red is Attacking.
Well, that answers that. But i wonder if there will be a tracker thing like there is for FW, showing which alliance has the most control and such.
Thanks for the answer btw
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 17:57:38 -
[74] - Quote
Mitnik wrote:Tappits wrote:
Blue is defending Red is Attacking.
Well, that answers that. But i wonder if there will be a tracker thing like there is for FW, showing which alliance has the most control and such. Thanks for the answer btw Tappits is correct on the colour codes. We also plan on expanding the tooltips to make it clearer.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:08:37 -
[75] - Quote
Will it be possible to boost speed on super builds? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:22:39 -
[76] - Quote
DNLeviathan wrote:Will it be possible to boost speed on super builds? Nope
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
9129
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:31:57 -
[77] - Quote
Will duality be back up soon? currently in VIP? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:44:31 -
[78] - Quote
Buhhdust Princess wrote:Will duality be back up soon? currently in VIP? As soon as we've completed the setup and done an update to the most recent code. (Assuming we don't find any showstopping bugs). We'll keep the thread updated as we go.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
9129
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:46:04 -
[79] - Quote
Ah ok apologies, I thought it was up earlier!
No worries and thank you :D |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:54:12 -
[80] - Quote
Buhhdust Princess wrote:Ah ok apologies, I thought it was up earlier!
No worries and thank you :D
We had been hoping to have it up an hour ago, but ran into a few small issues.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
613
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 18:55:53 -
[81] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Assuming we don't find any showstopping bugs. Drinking caffeinated beverages, listening to rock and roll, and testing builds as quickly and thoroughly as I can for you guys, just a usual day as an EVE QA (My servers currently rebooting which is why you're receiving this message)
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Alan Artemisa
The Dysfunctionals Fidelas Constans
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:22:38 -
[82] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Buhhdust Princess wrote:Ah ok apologies, I thought it was up earlier!
No worries and thank you :D We had been hoping to have it up an hour ago, but ran into a few small issues.
aka the server is on fire and they're all running screaming.
Thanks for the update though, much-appreciated! |
Doc Weed
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:27:13 -
[83] - Quote
Alan Artemisa wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Buhhdust Princess wrote:Ah ok apologies, I thought it was up earlier!
No worries and thank you :D We had been hoping to have it up an hour ago, but ran into a few small issues. aka the server is on fire and they're all running screaming. Thanks for the update though, much-appreciated!
Nah dude, he's running to the pet store to buy new hamsters and some food. Seriously though thanks for the updates CCP. |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
614
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:29:05 -
[84] - Quote
Alan Artemisa wrote: they're all running screaming. More like sitting and http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:32:31 -
[85] - Quote
Stop posting funny gifs and start opening duality up! We want to pew internet spaceships! |
nospet
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:33:37 -
[86] - Quote
Who needs math anyway |
Doc Weed
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:37:51 -
[87] - Quote
#gsfjabberleaks
Here are leaks from our most secret room in the gsf jabber.
(3:32:01 PM) eikie_kurvora: http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg (3:36:25 PM) eikie_kurvora: ccp lebowski liked my post i can die in peace now (3:37:30 PM) eikie_kurvora: my life in complete |
nospet
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:38:30 -
[88] - Quote
Doc Weed wrote:#gsfjabberleaks Here are leaks from our most secret room in the gsf jabber. (3:32:01 PM) eikie_kurvora: http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg (3:36:25 PM) eikie_kurvora: ccp lebowski liked my post i can die in peace now
Spai! |
Doc Weed
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:39:26 -
[89] - Quote
nospet wrote:Doc Weed wrote:#gsfjabberleaks Here are leaks from our most secret room in the gsf jabber. (3:32:01 PM) eikie_kurvora: http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg (3:36:25 PM) eikie_kurvora: ccp lebowski liked my post i can die in peace now Spai!
My ccp overlords promise me many spaceships to pew :P |
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:42:13 -
[90] - Quote
Doc Weed wrote:#gsfjabberleaks Here are leaks from our most secret room in the gsf jabber. (3:32:01 PM) eikie_kurvora: http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg (3:36:25 PM) eikie_kurvora: ccp lebowski liked my post i can die in peace now (3:37:30 PM) eikie_kurvora: my life in complete He is a spai get mittens to ban him then give him a free supercap! |
|
Doc Weed
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:43:11 -
[91] - Quote
Eikie Kurvora wrote:Doc Weed wrote:#gsfjabberleaks Here are leaks from our most secret room in the gsf jabber. (3:32:01 PM) eikie_kurvora: http://i.imgur.com/pQBtCSm.jpg (3:36:25 PM) eikie_kurvora: ccp lebowski liked my post i can die in peace now (3:37:30 PM) eikie_kurvora: my life in complete He is a spai get mittens to ban him then give him a free supercap!
I'd be down
#repsondoc? |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:44:43 -
[92] - Quote
i want to be a goon so i can say i know cool people |
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:49:26 -
[93] - Quote
DNLeviathan wrote:i want to be a goon so i can say i know cool people But we arent cool only sub-par only our sweet iskes and toonies are cooler! |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
614
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:53:15 -
[94] - Quote
Ok folks, the setup is complete, I've updated the known issues and we're taking the server down to update it to the latest build.
So basically what Im saying is ...
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:53:51 -
[95] - Quote
Update: We've set up all the sov structures and dev idex stuff. We're now taking the server down for an update. We'll keep the server in VIP when it comes up so we can make sure nothing is on fire, and then open it up if everything looks good.
Also Lebowski is faster than me.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 19:59:49 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Also Lebowski is faster than me.
I am sorry mr fozzie, you just got fourm sniped *pewpew* Also, a legimate question, will the servers on duality be able to withstand giant clashes and possibly titans without lighting on fire and burning the earth? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12962
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:01:58 -
[97] - Quote
Eikie Kurvora wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: Also Lebowski is faster than me.
I am sorry mr fozzie, you just got fourm sniped *pewpew* Also, a legimate question, will the servers on duality be able to withstand giant clashes and possibly titans without lighting on fire and burning the earth? Only one way to find out!
Serious answer is that we really don't know for sure but we *think* hardware performance will be somewhere between "normal TQ node" and "reinforced TQ node" levels. Unfortunately on Duality there's no extra supernodes so we can't reinforce systems.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
27
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:08:44 -
[98] - Quote
Can we donate some SSDs to make that rebooting faster? |
Nour Samy
Silver Guardians Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:15:08 -
[99] - Quote
Fozzie, can you hurry up please ? Keeping dozens of blood crazed, pervs and trolls entertained on comms is very hard you know.
Help a brotha out.
Oh btw this is a bit out dated but: http://i.imgur.com/YsUZgkv.gif |
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:17:46 -
[100] - Quote
Nour Samy wrote:Fozzie, can you hurry up please ? Keeping dozens of blood crazed, pervs and trolls entertained on comms is very hard you know. Help a brotha out. Oh btw this is a bit out dated but: http://i.imgur.com/YsUZgkv.gif Please, fozzie if you dont we will be forced to eat nour samy and his toonies, please we cannot stay at bay for much longer, open the floodgates! |
|
Doc Weed
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:23:50 -
[101] - Quote
Nour Samy wrote:Fozzie, can you hurry up please ? Keeping dozens of blood crazed, pervs and trolls entertained on comms is very hard you know. Help a brotha out. Oh btw this is a bit out dated but: http://i.imgur.com/YsUZgkv.gif PS.: (10:19:54 PM) eikie_kurvora: CCPLEASE IM GOING TO DIE (10:20:31 PM) doc_weed: C (10:20:32 PM) doc_weed: C (10:20:33 PM) doc_weed: P (10:20:35 PM) doc_weed: L (10:20:36 PM) doc_weed: E (10:20:37 PM) doc_weed: A (10:20:38 PM) doc_weed: S (10:20:39 PM) doc_weed: E See what i'm dealing with >_<
My **** posting will never be confined to jabber. |
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:27:25 -
[102] - Quote
Doc Weed wrote:Nour Samy wrote:Fozzie, can you hurry up please ? Keeping dozens of blood crazed, pervs and trolls entertained on comms is very hard you know. Help a brotha out. Oh btw this is a bit out dated but: http://i.imgur.com/YsUZgkv.gif PS.: (10:19:54 PM) eikie_kurvora: CCPLEASE IM GOING TO DIE (10:20:31 PM) doc_weed: C (10:20:32 PM) doc_weed: C (10:20:33 PM) doc_weed: P (10:20:35 PM) doc_weed: L (10:20:36 PM) doc_weed: E (10:20:37 PM) doc_weed: A (10:20:38 PM) doc_weed: S (10:20:39 PM) doc_weed: E See what i'm dealing with >_< My **** posting will never be confined to jabber. Nor will it be confined to the internet, one day you will lead the world in the art of begging for something to happen and it not happening cause of stealth edits, also. SWEET PAGE SNIPE! |
Sally Kafferton
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:49:37 -
[103] - Quote
Fozzie. I'm not sure if you understand this, but lives hang in the balance here. I'm literally by the bedside of an elderly man on his deathbed, upon said deathbed is the elderly man himself, who lies upon a bed, dying. In his delirium, he has come to believe that he's twenty five years old, and is rambling about how terrible Fozziesov is.
Let me show him the truth, Fozzie. Let me show him how grand these sov changes will be. Let me show him that EVE is in safe hands, that the future of this great game is assured. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12963
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:50:10 -
[104] - Quote
Sally Kafferton wrote:Fozzie. I'm not sure if you understand this, but lives hang in the balance here. I'm literally by the bedside of an elderly man on his deathbed, upon said deathbed is the elderly man himself, who lies upon a bed, dying. In his delirium, he has come to believe that he's twenty five years old, and is rambling about how terrible Fozziesov is.
Let me show him the truth, Fozzie. Let me show him how grand these sov changes will be. Let me show him that EVE is in safe hands, that the future of this great game is assured. Can I have his stuff?
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Sally Kafferton
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:51:03 -
[105] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Sally Kafferton wrote:Fozzie. I'm not sure if you understand this, but lives hang in the balance here. I'm literally by the bedside of an elderly man on his deathbed, upon said deathbed is the elderly man himself, who lies upon a bed, dying. In his delirium, he has come to believe that he's twenty five years old, and is rambling about how terrible Fozziesov is.
Let me show him the truth, Fozzie. Let me show him how grand these sov changes will be. Let me show him that EVE is in safe hands, that the future of this great game is assured. Can I have their stuff? I'll tell him to make a contract. |
DaReaper
Net 7
2221
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:54:50 -
[106] - Quote
Fozzie troll best troll lol
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Eikie Kurvora
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 20:56:28 -
[107] - Quote
Fozzie, the server not starting is uniting the Imperium! look at these leaked chats from the GSF jabber
#gsfjabberleaks (1:52:23 PM) doc_weed: C (1:52:26 PM) doc_weed: C (1:52:28 PM) doc_weed: P (1:52:29 PM) eikie_kurvora: L (1:52:30 PM) eikie_kurvora: E (1:52:31 PM) eikie_kurvora: A (1:52:32 PM) eikie_kurvora: S (1:52:33 PM) eikie_kurvora: E (1:52:40 PM) doc_weed: WE COMPLETE EACH OTHER (1:52:50 PM) eikie_kurvora: BROOOTHER |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12963
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:01:45 -
[108] - Quote
VIP mode has been removed, you should all be able to log onto Duality now.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Sally Kafferton
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:02:40 -
[109] - Quote
Cheers, now I've got an excuse to leave this old fart's bedside. |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:36:21 -
[110] - Quote
Uninitialized systems dont show the Invuln time window in Show Info unless at least one character entered that system (traffic control loading the system). http://i.imgur.com/J5WSs5F.png
Is there any reason why the invuln window in Show info shows a date and not only a time?
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12963
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:41:30 -
[111] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:Is there any reason why the invuln window in Show info shows a date and not only a time?
It's for debug purposes, in case something breaks and the vulnerability doesn't correctly happen every day. The text there will be changed before release.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 21:42:54 -
[112] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:kiu Nakamura wrote:Is there any reason why the invuln window in Show info shows a date and not only a time?
It's for debug purposes, in case something breaks and the vulnerability doesn't correctly happen every day. The text there will be changed before release.
Makes sense. I assume the current time is displayed for debugging purposes as well? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12965
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:13:51 -
[113] - Quote
An issue has been found that prevents the Activity Defense Multiplier from correctly increasing the time it takes to reinforce Stations, IHubs and TCUs. I've added it to the known issues and we'll have it fixed tomorrow.
We won't make a decision until I can talk to the whole team in the morning, but this means we might reset any reinforcements made between now and tomorrow's update. Nothing will be able to go through the whole reinforcement period before then anyways so nothing will have been destroyed/captured yet. We'll keep you updated.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:15:11 -
[114] - Quote
Ok so a little confused... when it says station/ihub/tcu 'invulnerable between 18.30 and 21.30 that tells me the rest of the time all our sov assets are vulnerable to attack? isnt that the wrong way around |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:17:15 -
[115] - Quote
our home window is also missing one of our systems - IWZ3-C
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12965
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:18:26 -
[116] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Ok so a little confused... when it says station/ihub/tcu 'invulnerable between 18.30 and 21.30 that tells me the rest of the time all our sov assets are vulnerable to attack? isnt that the wrong way around Yup the wording isn't clear in this version. The first line shows the current state: "IHub Invulnerable". The next lines show when it will become vulnerable.
We're planning on changing it to look more like:
IHub Secure Vulnerability Window xx:xx - xx:xx
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 22:21:01 -
[117] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Ok so a little confused... when it says station/ihub/tcu 'invulnerable between 18.30 and 21.30 that tells me the rest of the time all our sov assets are vulnerable to attack? isnt that the wrong way around
It say:
Quote:Station/Ihub/TCU Invulnerable
2015.06.19 XX:XX:XX 2015.06.19 XX:XX:XX
The first part says whether a structure is vulnerable or not, the second part when it's actually vulnerable (you can tell because the systems with lower indexes have a bigger window, higher index = smaller window) |
Jayne Fillon
719
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:15:05 -
[118] - Quote
IHUB upgrades cannot be installed atm
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12966
|
Posted - 2015.06.18 23:18:10 -
[119] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:IHUB upgrades cannot be installed atm Toss in a bug report from within the client (so that it includes the logs) and we'll take a look.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 00:14:50 -
[120] - Quote
So where can we see whats being attacked across our constellation without flying through the systems? i thought it would be in the sov window under the alliances tab? And a mail saying sov structure is being captured?
|
|
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
1013
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:25:17 -
[121] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ryno Caval wrote:I don't know if anyone else is having this issue but when I attempt to log onto Duality I am being prompted that my account has been disabled. Is this a known problem or am I not doing something right. I've reactivated you. For anyone else with the same problem, post in this thread.
~Activate Me~ Why did CCP stop seeing faction, storyline and officer stuff? Doesn't that skew the testing environment?
CSM 11 Candidate
My Lore Predictions
|
Vallen Netherscorn
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 01:36:37 -
[122] - Quote
copyskills is not working. |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 02:42:28 -
[123] - Quote
May be a bug with station settings we had reds docking up in our station |
Blue Ice
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 03:38:30 -
[124] - Quote
Reinforcement timers not diplaying correctly on the sovereignty tab in show info. They show 2 hours whenever you refresh the page. |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 08:40:40 -
[125] - Quote
We had no reinforcement timer on the TCU in IWZ3-C or notification that it was under attack It just flipped to Brave |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 09:09:53 -
[126] - Quote
Still not able to install strategic upgrades
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12966
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 11:00:36 -
[127] - Quote
Hey everyone. We discussed the Activity Defense Multiplier bug internally and have decided how we'll proceed. We'll be updating the server early this afternoon with a new build that fixes that bug.
When we bring the server back up we will go through each constellation that has been reinforced and "un-reinforce" all but two of the systems. That means we will still have plenty of action tonight as systems exit reinforced but the alliances who had their whole constellations hit while this bug was active will have a more reasonable defense task.
Since the display of reinforcement exit timers is currently broken I will also post a list of every sov structure within the competition area that remains reinforced along with the exact exit time of their reinforcement.
There are also a few systems where we messed up the initial setup (which allowed odd things to happen). We'll be correcting those mistakes today. This means that the IHub in 3GXF-U will be transferred to Suddenly Spaceships, the TCU in IW23-C will be transferred to Stella Nova, and the IHUb and TCU in G7AQ-7 will be transferred to Eurasia Alliance.
Thanks for the bug reports last night everyone.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 11:41:30 -
[128] - Quote
there goes all the effort |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 12:00:28 -
[129] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:there goes all the effort
Its fine we only wasted 12h worth of Entosisinginging stuff. :( |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
241
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 12:01:54 -
[130] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:there goes all the effort
Think of the headache if this was TQ
Alliance who finds/submits the most bugs should get a nod as well....
<-10.0> bug hunter guide or something |
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
241
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 12:02:39 -
[131] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Warmeister wrote:there goes all the effort Its fine we only wasted 12h worth of Entosisinginging stuff. :(
Maybe we should submit a petition to get our stront back |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
446
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 12:59:47 -
[132] - Quote
My first time playing with the new sov system was over the last few hours, and I must admit, it's been a while since I've laughed this hard :)
We wanted to set up cyno jammers in each of our systems, and also a jumpbridge, because, well, why not? It's our first time playing with sov!
Got all the stuff purchased, then realized we'd need a jfreighter or freighter to move it.
Of course, NOT ONE of us online in the AU TZ could fly a freighter!!
Shortly thereafter, Pandemic Legion's AU TZ woke up and, of course, started messing with our sov structures. I realized they could dock in our stations, so I changed the settings on our stations to stop non-blues from docking, and subsequently locked everyone in my alliance out of our stations! Had to ask a Pandemic Legion pilot in local how to fix it!!!
Almost hate to admit it... but before I logged on, some of my guys didn't attack some sov structures because they thought the vulnerability window time meant the targets were INvulnerable. Looking forward to when the wording is cleared up on that :)
Sov is fun :)
Bug/Issue: iHubs won't let you install cyno jammer upgrade, cyno beacon upgrade, quantum flux upgrade, or jump bridge upgrade. Click and drag all you want, they just won't go into the ihub.
Bug/Issue: Show Info on any alliance and they all say vulnerable timer starts at 10:00, regardless of actual setting.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
29
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 13:32:47 -
[133] - Quote
Guys i realise its really frustrating to get stuff set up only to maybe have it reset but we signed up for this to test the mechanics... its not sorted... its going to be buggy as F**k.. thats the point..
So when, later on in frustration, I come and moan about everything being reset for the third time just quote this post back at me...
We are here to test it to destruction and it will break... the whole point is that it gets fixed before it goes live...
And please I'd kill for these prices on TQ.. its loose change... |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12967
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 14:28:22 -
[134] - Quote
Ok everyone we've updated the server and it should be open to you soon.
Like I said above, we've removed some of the reinforcement timers and left others. None of the station services have been changed so if you disabled them before the reboot they're still disabled.
Since the display of reinforcement exit timers is currently bugged, I'll provide a list here of all the reinforced sov structures in the competition zone at the time of this posting:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.06.19 21:52 XHQ-7V IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 5.2 2015.06.19 22:01 YQB-22 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 2015.06.19 22:15 YQB-22 TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 2015.06.19 22:24 18XA-C Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 2015.06.19 22:28 YQB-22 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 2015.06.19 22:37 18XA-C TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 2015.06.19 22:39 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 2015.06.19 22:43 VKI-T7 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 5.5 2015.06.19 22:48 VKI-T7 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 5.5 2015.06.19 22:49 VKI-T7 TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 5.5 2015.06.19 23:10 3D-CQU TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.7 2015.06.19 23:19 3D-CQU IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.7 2015.06.19 23:24 3D-CQU Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.7 2015.06.20 00:22 T-RPFU IHub Oceania Alliance 4.9 2015.06.20 00:23 T-RPFU TCU Oceania Alliance 4.9 2015.06.20 00:25 T-RPFU Station Oceania Alliance 4.9 2015.06.20 00:43 KA6D-K Station Oceania Alliance 3.6 2015.06.20 00:56 KA6D-K TCU Oceania Alliance 3.6 2015.06.20 01:00 KA6D-K IHub Oceania Alliance 3.6 2015.06.20 06:48 FC-3YI TCU No Not Believing 4.9 2015.06.20 06:55 FC-3YI IHub No Not Believing 4.9 2015.06.20 06:58 FC-3YI Station No Not Believing 4.9 2015.06.20 07:28 DP-JD4 Station No Not Believing 4.7 2015.06.20 07:35 DP-JD4 TCU No Not Believing 4.7 2015.06.20 07:47 DP-JD4 IHub No Not Believing 4.7 2015.06.20 08:20 TA3T-3 TCU Eastasia Alliance 3.1 2015.06.20 08:33 TA3T-3 IHub Eastasia Alliance 3.1 2015.06.20 09:58 HP-6Z6 IHub Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4.2 2015.06.20 10:02 HP-6Z6 TCU Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4.2 2015.06.20 10:02 HP-6Z6 Station Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 4.2 2015.06.20 10:12 7YWV-S IHub Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 5.3 2015.06.20 10:18 7YWV-S TCU Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 5.3 2015.06.20 10:25 LF-2KP TCU Q Alliance 4.5 2015.06.20 10:25 7YWV-S Station Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 5.3 2015.06.20 10:28 LF-2KP Station Q Alliance 4.5 2015.06.20 10:30 K1I1-J TCU Q Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 10:35 N8XA-L Station Affirmative. 6 2015.06.20 10:39 LF-2KP IHub Q Alliance 4.5 2015.06.20 10:46 K1I1-J IHub Q Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 10:53 N8XA-L TCU Affirmative. 6 2015.06.20 11:04 K1I1-J Station Q Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 11:05 N8XA-L IHub Affirmative. 6 2015.06.20 11:09 MH9C-S Station Eastasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 11:15 MH9C-S IHub Eastasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 11:15 MH9C-S TCU Eastasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 11:21 18-GZM IHub Affirmative. 4.7 2015.06.20 11:24 18-GZM TCU Affirmative. 4.7
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 14:51:59 -
[135] - Quote
Shameless plug for people in need of calculating entosis times: http://entosis.501gu.de
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 17:38:20 -
[136] - Quote
IWZ3-C Fixed ownership on TCU > BUT Sov index is at zero Was this an oversight it was at 3 or 4 previously? |
Mitnik
BOVRIL bOREers Mining CO-OP Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 17:45:59 -
[137] - Quote
looks like we'll have to reinforce those No not systems again tonight :/ |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 18:16:14 -
[138] - Quote
Still not accepting strategic upgrades but when we did manage to get a cyno inhib installed when we tried to anchor the jammer the error message was 'you can only do this in a system with an ihub' that was in K1Y-5H
We managed to get it to accept the module 2 or 3 times got a green tick and then....
But when you close the management window and then reopen the upgrade is not longer installed and the module is still in the jump freighter |
Jayne Fillon
720
|
Posted - 2015.06.19 20:14:19 -
[139] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Still not accepting strategic upgrades but when we did manage to get a cyno inhib installed when we tried to anchor the jammer the error message was 'you can only do this in a system with an ihub' that was in K1Y-5H
We managed to get it to accept the module 2 or 3 times got a green tick and then....
But when you close the management window and then reopen the upgrade is not longer installed and the module is still in the jump freighter
We're having similar issues with ihub updates
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 05:49:43 -
[140] - Quote
i hope the time for capturing the command nodes will go down when it hits tranquility |
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:00:11 -
[141] - Quote
Sat on a number of command nodes now, and, while I do see the benefits of this system over TQ sov.... I can't help but think, would things have been better if we were now testing the "free-form" model for sov - build anything, anywhere; blow up anything, anywhere....
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
131
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 13:54:15 -
[142] - Quote
We could use some new timers Fozzie, we're past the list from yesterday.
I've spent the last ~5 hours entosis linking **** and here's some thoughts:
- The plexes need some way to tell each other apart. Often they even spawn in very similar areas so giving them some kind of code to differentiate them from each other is really necessary.
- The warmup on a capital using an entosis link is ok, but the cooldown at the end of the cycle is pretty heavy handed. Even just having to sit around for an extra 1-2 minutes on a subcap feels wasted, but being stuck somewhere for 9 extra minutes because that's just how the cycles worked out on your carrier is awful. From reading the notes on the module I was under the impression that the cycle time would still be 2 minutes and it was just the warmup phase that was extended. In practice the module seems to have a 10min cycle time on capitals.
- Taking sov that's completely uncontested shouldn't be this painful. I realize on TQ uncontested sov will most likely have lower indexes, but still. Maybe some kind of acceleration factor where if the defender (or attacker) doesn't entosis any of their plexes, as the other party completes them the capture rate speeds up? |
klana depp
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 14:54:53 -
[143] - Quote
BlitZ Kotare wrote: - The plexes need some way to tell each other apart. Often they even spawn in very similar areas so giving them some kind of code to differentiate them from each other is really necessary.
ack - it was hard to tell apart newly spawned sites from existing ones, fleet was a mess even tho there was not a single hostile in system. yeah people will get used to it, but still, something like a scan signature that shows up in the name - maybe in front of the system name? - would be great.
BlitZ Kotare wrote: - Taking sov that's completely uncontested shouldn't be this painful. I realize on TQ uncontested sov will most likely have lower indexes, but still. Maybe some kind of acceleration factor where if the defender (or attacker) doesn't entosis any of their plexes, as the other party completes them the capture rate speeds up?
agreed. yesterday we decided to just give up because it was too boring to wait for 43 minutes doing nothing. i understand that the purpose is to cap military power of entities that have lots of it but this is just making me wanna close the client for the day :P
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:03:49 -
[144] - Quote
klana depp wrote:BlitZ Kotare wrote: - The plexes need some way to tell each other apart. Often they even spawn in very similar areas so giving them some kind of code to differentiate them from each other is really necessary.
ack - it was hard to tell apart newly spawned sites from existing ones, fleet was a mess even tho there was not a single hostile in system. yeah people will get used to it, but still, something like a scan signature that shows up in the name - maybe in front of the system name? - would be great. BlitZ Kotare wrote: - Taking sov that's completely uncontested shouldn't be this painful. I realize on TQ uncontested sov will most likely have lower indexes, but still. Maybe some kind of acceleration factor where if the defender (or attacker) doesn't entosis any of their plexes, as the other party completes them the capture rate speeds up?
agreed. yesterday we decided to just give up because it was too boring to wait for 43 minutes doing nothing. i understand that the purpose is to cap military power of entities that have lots of it but this is just making me wanna close the client for the day :P
you could always try it in sub caps
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12974
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:26:44 -
[145] - Quote
Here's the most up to date list of reinforcement exits in the competition zone:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing YQB-22 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 Ongoing YQB-22 TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 Ongoing YQB-22 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 4.7 Ongoing 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 Ongoing VKI-T7 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 5.5 Ongoing VKI-T7 TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 5.5 Ongoing 3D-CQU TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.7 Ongoing 3D-CQU IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.7 Ongoing LF-2KP TCU Q Alliance 4.5 Ongoing LF-2KP Station Q Alliance 4.5 Ongoing K1I1-J TCU Q Alliance 5.2 Ongoing LF-2KP IHub Q Alliance 4.5 Ongoing K1I1-J IHub Q Alliance 5.2 Ongoing K1I1-J Station Q Alliance 5.2 Ongoing MH9C-S Station Eastasia Alliance 5.2 Ongoing MH9C-S IHub Eastasia Alliance 5.2 Ongoing MH9C-S TCU Eastasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 15:34 G-AOTH Station Eurasia Alliance 3 2015.06.20 15:40 G-AOTH TCU Eurasia Alliance 3 2015.06.20 15:49 G-AOTH IHub Eurasia Alliance 3 2015.06.20 16:14 CBL-XP IHub Nemesis Enterprises. 2.5 2015.06.20 16:17 G7AQ-7 TCU Eurasia Alliance 3.7 2015.06.20 16:19 D-GTMI Station Eurasia Alliance 2.4 2015.06.20 16:42 G7AQ-7 IHub Eurasia Alliance 3.7 2015.06.20 16:45 CBL-XP TCU Nemesis Enterprises. 2.5 2015.06.20 16:46 D-GTMI TCU Eurasia Alliance 2.4 2015.06.20 17:01 UL-7I8 IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.8 2015.06.20 17:17 D-GTMI IHub Eurasia Alliance 2.4 2015.06.20 17:20 FSW-3C IHub Eurasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.20 18:08 ZQ-Z3Y TCU Eurasia Alliance 6 2015.06.20 18:11 GN7-XY IHub DARKNESS. 4.7 2015.06.20 18:12 GN7-XY TCU DARKNESS. 4.7 2015.06.20 18:16 PI5-39 Station DARKNESS. 4.9 2015.06.20 18:21 5KG-PY Station DARKNESS. 3.9 2015.06.20 18:27 ZQ-Z3Y IHub Eurasia Alliance 6 2015.06.20 18:31 F-DTOO IHub DARKNESS. 6 2015.06.20 18:31 F-DTOO Station DARKNESS. 6 2015.06.20 18:31 F-DTOO TCU DARKNESS. 6 2015.06.20 18:42 PI5-39 IHub DARKNESS. 4.9 2015.06.20 18:43 GN7-XY Station DARKNESS. 4.7 2015.06.20 18:43 ZQ-Z3Y Station Eurasia Alliance 6 2015.06.20 18:45 PI5-39 TCU DARKNESS. 4.9 2015.06.20 18:58 INQ-WR TCU DARKNESS. 5.8 2015.06.20 18:59 QO-SRI TCU DARKNESS. 4.3 2015.06.20 19:22 INQ-WR IHub DARKNESS. 5.8 2015.06.20 19:25 5KG-PY TCU DARKNESS. 3.9 2015.06.20 19:35 5KG-PY IHub DARKNESS. 3.9 2015.06.20 19:41 QO-SRI IHub DARKNESS. 4.3 2015.06.20 20:36 H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 6 2015.06.20 22:19 FSW-3C TCU Eurasia Alliance 5.2 2015.06.21 00:16 9-F0B2 Station Brave Collective 3.6 2015.06.21 00:24 49GC-R Station Brave Collective 3.2 2015.06.21 01:08 I7S-1S TCU Oceania Alliance 4.1 2015.06.21 02:52 KA6D-K Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 03:08 9UY4-H Station Brave Collective 6 2015.06.21 03:20 3GXF-U&nbs...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12974
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:38:36 -
[146] - Quote
As for the discussion around the capture speed of nodes this really comes down to the challenge of balancing between the desires and goals of attackers and defenders. We're definitely listening and this system has been built from the beginning to be easily adjustable. However we're not going to jump into any changes from one day of Duality testing, especially considering that the balance of this test is significantly different than any expected TQ situation (smaller groups hitting largely undefended systems with unusually high multipliers). As the test period goes on we will be interested to see how the lower defensive multipliers (thanks to normal decay and system changing hands losing their Strategic index) will impact the flow as well as what happens when the active groups start running out of undefended territory and begin bumping heads with each other more.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 15:57:22 -
[147] - Quote
klana depp wrote:yesterday we decided to just give up because it was too boring to wait for 43 minutes doing nothing.
If you don't want to invest 43m to conquer space on your behalf, you dont want that space in the first place. SCNR. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 16:00:25 -
[148] - Quote
Is it possible for something to cause station vulnerability windows to change? we've (apparently randomly) now got one of ours out of sync with the other (i.e. TCU/IHub) vulnerability windows...
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Dreamer Targaryen
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 18:12:56 -
[149] - Quote
I would appreciate having a timer of the cooldown-cycle at the end, to know when I am finally free to warp off again. Regarding the 45min-1h entosis-periode, I disagree with shortening it. Taking the living-space from people, should take you at least an hour. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 19:59:31 -
[150] - Quote
Just for info; when you pop the nodes associated with the IHub, it (the IHub) just disappears - no big badda boom :/
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 20:45:16 -
[151] - Quote
Q: I drop an Ihub, it appears as 'Concord' = I have to Entosis my own Ihub??
So, we got rid of a [J4LP] Ihub, dropped our own in place, then had a massive scrap with [Brave], but .. should it not have dropped as ours off the bat?
We pinned their Jump freighter to prevent them dropping their own Ihub, but the 'Concord' thing screwed us in the end....
(they said same happened to them the other day)
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 21:13:26 -
[152] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Q: I drop an Ihub, it appears as 'Concord' = I have to Entosis my own Ihub??
In the current system you need to anchor and then online stuff. In the new system you throw it in space and entosis it. Not that different? |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.20 21:16:42 -
[153] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Q: I drop an Ihub, it appears as 'Concord' = I have to Entosis my own Ihub?? In the current system you need to anchor and then online stuff. In the new system you throw it in space and entosis it. Not that different? I guess so, just was unexpected at the time.
Edit: Terrible grid-fu at the time too; was sat on the Ihub and couldn't lock it, nor see what was happening, we only figured out too late.
Ah well, if this is the design intent - noted.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
312
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 07:44:13 -
[154] - Quote
CCP Fozzie, for the love of all that is holy; please remove the alliance tournament ships from the market. They are extremely over powered, as they should be, but to have them for free and unlimited is just silly. I have spent a good amount of time trying to help test this new sov system, but this **** is out of control. It breaks all reality of what would be on TQ and completely ***** up everything everywhere. It is challenging enough to deal with Pandemic Legion having all their super carriers and titans in this tiny test pocket, but to be constantly facing AT ships rolling with high grade pirate implants and links...
Leaving these on the market was a colossal mistake.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
105
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 10:24:11 -
[155] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie, for the love of all that is holy; please remove the alliance tournament ships from the market. They are extremely over powered, as they should be, but to have them for free and unlimited is just silly. I have spent a good amount of time trying to help test this new sov system, but this **** is out of control. It breaks all reality of what would be on TQ and completely ***** up everything everywhere. It is challenging enough to deal with Pandemic Legion having all their super carriers and titans in this tiny test pocket, but to be constantly facing AT ships rolling with high grade pirate implants and links... Leaving these on the market was a colossal mistake.
Its no more imbalanced than 100isk Carriers and Dreads. Its in fact not imbalanced at all as every one has access to them.
Maybe you would like then to unseed the systems and just copy over assets from TQ to make it fare? We will still have access to AT ships dreads slowcats and supers and you can run eagles for everything? |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:13:37 -
[156] - Quote
Could mail notifications of sov attacks go out across the whole alliance? Most sov is held by holding corps with a few alts in so... or will it show on everyones sov dashboard?
It would be really great to see 'real' data instead of fake data to try to get a feel for what that will be giving us |
Agustus palpius
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:20:56 -
[157] - Quote
It'd be really nice to have the beacons be uniquely identifiable by a number of sig tag like when probing. Currently differentiating each individual node is fairly difficult.
Another nice thing would be more access to the soverignty tab built into the game. The ability to right-click a node and see the sovereignty of the given system (what's contested / what the modifier is) would be nice. |
Don Pera Saissore
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:25:06 -
[158] - Quote
The at ships outperform all other ships of the same class. If you want to use a ceptor there is no reason why you shouldnt use the whiptal, same for logi just use the etana.
I was roaming around yesterday and it seems that most of the groups gave up. PL has consumed their neigbours, brave is brave and they are being kicked around by everyone (small advice, dreds cost 100 isk just keep undocking them if someone comes knocking on your station). It looks like pl brave and spectre are the most active groups there. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:52:20 -
[159] - Quote
Our neighbors didn't even bother to login (apart from Affirmative.) |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 12:58:03 -
[160] - Quote
without wanting to draw attention to ourselves we've been active since the start but we are one of the smaller alliances... |
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1703
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 13:08:19 -
[161] - Quote
BlitZ Kotare wrote:The plexes need some way to tell each other apart. Often they even spawn in very similar areas so giving them some kind of code to differentiate them from each other is really necessary. Yes, we're planning to add something like that - most likely similar to the way scan sigs work. Probably a three-character alphanumeric code should be unique enough for each system. If you have preferences for avoiding very wide overview columns, feel free to post suggestions on how you think they could be best named.
Gabriel Karade wrote:Just for info; when you pop the nodes associated with the IHub, it (the IHub) just disappears - no big badda boom :/ I know TCUs were exploding plenty. I'll have a check for IHubs and see what is up there. What is the fun of going to all that effort without a satisfying explosion at the end :)
Gabriel Karade wrote:kiu Nakamura wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Q: I drop an Ihub, it appears as 'Concord' = I have to Entosis my own Ihub?? In the current system you need to anchor and then online stuff. In the new system you throw it in space and entosis it. Not that different? I guess so, just was unexpected at the time. Edit: Terrible grid-fu at the time too; was sat on the Ihub and couldn't lock it, nor see what was happening, we only figured out too late. Ah well, if this is the design intent - noted (but there should probably be something in the description about having to Entosis it) Having newly-launched IHubs/TCUs owned by an NPC is intended. You should only be deploying those structures once you've got the area under control. Getting a TCU down shouldn't be a matter of who can spam Anchor the fastest. (We'll probably change it from CONCORD though, as that doesn't quite fit thematically as they don't really have much presence in alliance sov matters)
I'm not sure if the structures are currently snapping to the grid centers when launched. The intention is that they will always jump to the closest grid center that is currently unoccupied, to avoid overlapping/bumping issues.
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Could mail notifications of sov attacks go out across the whole alliance? Most sov is held by holding corps with a few alts in so... or will it show on everyones sov dashboard?
It would be really great to see 'real' data instead of fake data to try to get a feel for what that will be giving us Hooking up real data on the sov dashboard is one of the next priority tasks. That should give you a better idea of what is happening and where.
"This one time, on patch day..."
@ccp_masterplan | Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
|
|
Dorijan
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 13:27:34 -
[162] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote: Hooking up real data on the sov dashboard is one of the next priority tasks. That should give you a better idea of what is happening and where.
This whole thing needs to come with API/CREST endpoints from the beginning. Tracking all of this in-game, exporting the data to external tools is just going to be annoying and will make people not want to deal with it.
What are your plans in this regard? |
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
131
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 13:29:25 -
[163] - Quote
As far as the complex nodes, at a minimum the 3 character semi-random naming would be sufficient. If you're going to keep them as "celestial beacons" they need their own overview category so they don't overlap with cynos, so we can exclude them from pvp overviews but have them present on navigation ones. Basically on general PVP overviews we want everything that's not a hostile ship to be kept off of them, with cynos and gates being some of the only exceptions. In some of these systems on duality the entire overview is filling up with nothing but plexes, and navigating the spam is tedious.
One of the guys in our fleet had the idea that they should spawn as combat anoms, which would move them to the scanner instead. That might be another option?
Also, some of the capture timers seem to be rotating backwards. Or at least they're not consistent. Some of the TCU and iHub reinforcement cycles are green, some are white. Some rotate counter-clockwise, some clockwise. For the entosising of command nodes themselves they seem to always be green and go clockwise. Green > white imo, the white blends into too many other labels in the UI that cause issues seeing what stage the timer is at. We'd also pretty unanimously like a digital timer (maybe by mousing over the module or in space next to the rotating bit) so that we clearly know how much time is left. A rotating thing in space isn't very specific. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3448
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 14:23:26 -
[164] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote:BlitZ Kotare wrote:The plexes need some way to tell each other apart. Often they even spawn in very similar areas so giving them some kind of code to differentiate them from each other is really necessary. Yes, we're planning to add something like that - most likely similar to the way scan sigs work. Probably a three-character alphanumeric code should be unique enough for each system. If you have preferences for avoiding very wide overview columns, feel free to post suggestions on how you think they could be best named. How about just one letter and one number? Like A1, E5, or Z8. I doubt you would ever get more than 260 sites in one system, so you can insure there are no repeats. Repeating a name in a different solar system is OK, as the overview does not show what is in another solar system. You may even be able to make the letter be the same for all sites associated with a given capture event.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12975
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 15:24:38 -
[165] - Quote
Here's the latest list of reinforcement timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing ZQ-Z3Y TCU Defense Eurasia Alliance 0.166666667 Ongoing ZQ-Z3Y IHub Defense Eurasia Alliance 0.166666667 Ongoing 3GXF-U IHub Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.222222222 Ongoing J6QB-P TCU Defense Oceania Alliance 0.454545455 Ongoing J6QB-P IHub Defense Oceania Alliance 0.454545455 Ongoing J6QB-P Station Defense Oceania Alliance 0.454545455 Ongoing 2V-CS5 IHub Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.188679245 Ongoing 2V-CS5 Station Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.188679245 Ongoing 2V-CS5 TCU Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.188679245 Ongoing TXJ-II IHub Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing H9-J8N IHub Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing H9-J8N Station Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing GA9P-0 Station Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing TXJ-II Station Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing TXJ-II TCU Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing GA9P-0 TCU Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing GA9P-0 IHub Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing H9-J8N TCU Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.166666667 Ongoing 3GXF-U TCU Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.222222222 Ongoing C1-HAB IHub Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.175438596 Ongoing C1-HAB TCU Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.175438596 Ongoing C1-HAB Station Defense Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 0.175438596 Ongoing MVCJ-E TCU Defense Q Alliance 0.188679245 2015.06.21 16:07 MH9C-S Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 16:50 YQB-22 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 17:27 K1I1-J Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 18:56 IS-R7P TCU Defense Praetorian Directorate 0.166666667 2015.06.21 19:05 IS-R7P Station Defense Praetorian Directorate 0.166666667 2015.06.21 19:05 BR-N97 TCU Defense Praetorian Directorate 0.166666667 2015.06.21 19:14 LF-2KP Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 19:16 IS-R7P IHub Defense Praetorian Directorate 0.166666667 2015.06.21 19:45 3KB-J0 Station Defense I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 0.166666667 2015.06.21 20:00 G-AOTH Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.21 21:56 T-RPFU TCU Defense Pandemic Legion 0.23255814 2015.06.21 22:02 F-YH5B IHub Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.166666667 2015.06.21 23:06 F-YH5B Station Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.166666667 2015.06.21 23:18 F-YH5B TCU Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.166666667 2015.06.21 23:37 8P9-BM Station Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.175438596 2015.06.22 00:32 8P9-BM IHub Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.175438596 2015.06.22 00:59 3D-CQU IHub Defense Brave Collective 0.212765957 2015.06.22 01:25 8P9-BM TCU Defense Suddenly Spaceships. 0.175438596 2015.06.22 01:34 VKI-T7 TCU Defense Brave Collective 0.212765957 2015.06.22 01:35 YWS0-Z Station Defense Brave Collective 0.178571429 2015.06.22 01:38 YWS0-Z IHub Defense Brave Collective 0.178571429 2015.06.22 01:39 YWS0-Z TCU Defense Brave Collective 0.178571429 2015.06.22 02:17 QBL-BV TCU Defense Oceania Alliance 0.166666667 2015.06.22 02:46 D-GTMI Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.22 03:00 F-DTOO  ...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 16:14:49 -
[166] - Quote
any news on being able to install upgrades in ihubs? and just to double check that cyno jam or jump bridge is a choice?
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
12975
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 16:31:38 -
[167] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:any news on being able to install upgrades in ihubs? and just to double check that cyno jam or jump bridge is a choice?
No progress on that will be made until normal working hours next week.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
312
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 16:38:44 -
[168] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Its no more imbalanced than 100isk Carriers and Dreads. Its in fact not imbalanced at all as every one has access to them. Wow, you have no clue how balancing works do you?
Tappits wrote:Maybe you would like then to unseed the systems and just copy over assets from TQ to make it fare? We will still have access to AT ships dreads slowcats and supers and you can run eagles for everything? I never said that or anything like that and you know it.
Tappits wrote:I also think when we we blocked you in your station last night we used Full TQ roaming setups that we use all the time and not 50 AT ships so i have no idea what your on about. I have been on the Duality a good portion of every day since the start of this thing and when it comes to any confrontation at a node, it has been nothing but alliance tournament ships. Only at the VERY end of last night, when it was obvious PL was going to win with the help of Spectre did you guys ditch the AT ships. You switched over to Bhargest to sit on each node so you had the range to hit out to 250km. On our station you had a **** ton of super capitals. We were vastly outnumbered and outgunned. I get that. But please don't lie your ass off saying you have not been using AT ships. You guys have been using them exclusively since the beginning for this contest.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Jayne Fillon
721
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 16:51:48 -
[169] - Quote
I don't understand the complaint about AT ships, they are equally accessible to all.
Also, endless capitals are way worse than a couple of powerful cruisers and frigates. Way worse.
Regardless, in the end this isn't about balancing, it's about testing the sov.
You either use what's good because it's good and win, or fly inferior ships and lose.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:07:23 -
[170] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Regardless, in the end this isn't about balancing, it's about testing the sov.
That would have been correct if the thing would have been sold as a test. But it is a competition for some reason. And everyone in eve already knows how it will end. PL will win and smug about having their name on the module for the next years.
It is really disappointing to see how CCP failed on setting this up (even though they put so much work in it, it is appreciated), the winner seems to be determined by who-piled-the-most-super-assets-as-their-alliance-exists-since-the-stone-age.
|
|
Don Pera Saissore
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:09:05 -
[171] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:I don't understand the complaint about AT ships, they are equally accessible to all.
Unless you lack the skills for them... |
Jayne Fillon
721
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:13:45 -
[172] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:Jayne Fillon wrote:Regardless, in the end this isn't about balancing, it's about testing the sov. That would have been correct if the thing would have been sold as a test. But it is a competition for some reason. And everyone in eve already knows how it will end. PL will win and smug about having their name on the module for the next years. It is really disappointing to see how CCP failed on setting this up (even though they put so much work in it, it is appreciated), the winner seems to be determined by who-piled-the-most-super-assets-as-their-alliance-exists-since-the-stone-age. The alliance tournament is a competition, and it's held on TQ. The wargames are a test, and it's being run on Duality, a test server.
I agree about the supers thing, but really, supers aren't nearly as valuable in this new system.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Jayne Fillon
721
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:16:35 -
[173] - Quote
Don Pera Saissore wrote:Jayne Fillon wrote:I don't understand the complaint about AT ships, they are equally accessible to all. Unless you lack the skills for them... The same could be said for any ship, T1, T2, Faction, or AT. Should we round down to the lowest common denominator?
Of course skillpoints are a factor.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Don Pera Saissore
49
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:30:34 -
[174] - Quote
Yes t1 ships only.
I'm kidding, i don't care what rules you impose, this test is a joke. |
kiu Nakamura
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:33:24 -
[175] - Quote
kiu Nakamura wrote:That would have been correct if the thing would have been sold as a test. But it is a competition for some reason.
Jayne Fillon wrote:The wargame is a test, run on Duality... a test server.
Maybe you take a look at this forum post title. "sovereignity playtest COMPETITION". It was sold by CCP as a competition not as a Sisi Masstest.
Jayne Fillon wrote:I agree about the supers thing, but really, supers aren't nearly as valuable in this new system.
Have you been on Duality? Supers are OP killing everyone.
|
Jayne Fillon
721
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 17:45:13 -
[176] - Quote
Quote:Jayne Fillon wrote:I agree about the supers thing, but really, supers aren't nearly as valuable in this new system. Have you been on Duality? Supers are OP killing everyone. After two hours of fighting over command nodes all across the constellation, not a single super was used to freeport 9UY.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
312
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 18:29:04 -
[177] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Don Pera Saissore wrote:Jayne Fillon wrote:I don't understand the complaint about AT ships, they are equally accessible to all. Unless you lack the skills for them... The same could be said for any ship, T1, T2, Faction, or AT. Should we round down to the lowest common denominator? Of course skillpoints are a factor. Show me which T1 or T2 cruiser that functions as a Gila and Falcon rolled into one ship. Proclaiming that a ship being available to all and free for a competition means it is balanced is asinine. AT ships are over powered and exist on TQ only because they are ultra rare and insanely expensive. The entire environment is saturated with completely unrealistic things that are impossible on TQ now and even after the new sov system happens.
But the truth is there is other factors working against us. We have FC's who insist we form up capitals to brawl PL and Spectre on our undock during the node capture phase. Effectively accomplishing nothing but to entertain Spectre while PL capture the nodes. Turns out he is Spectre FC working with PL on their comms to keep us busy while they win nodes. gg And factor in people who can't grasp the idea that during the node capture phase you can no longer form one fleet of the biggest ships possible and brawl in one system on one grid no matter how many times it is explained to them it wont work. Again, gg.
The good news is those of us who actually care about this new sov system and want to bug hunt and test to make sure it is the best it can be are going to completely ignore the spy fc's you guys send over to 'help us' and do something completely different. Things like not purposely lose objectives. Purposely welp fleets to entertain the enemy. Yell at fleet members who are actually doing things the right way because they wont form up a dread and smash their face into a titans fist on the undock when there is nodes to be capture instead.
My entire point is this competition and test of the new sov system is broken due to a couple oversights with AT ships and even 100 ISK endless capitals. Factor in the sheer amount of supers moved down into the pocket, it is impossible to get any kind of real reading to see if things need to be adjusted before this hits TQ.
I would say please stop sending over spies to try and FC us to lose on purpose, but we have far too many people willing to x up with a capital and welp into titans during the node phases. Reminds me of jingling keys in front of Chris Griffin on Family Guy.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
107
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 19:22:11 -
[178] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:[Turns out he is Spectre FC working with PL on their comms to keep us busy while they win nodes. gg And factor in people who can't grasp the idea that during the node capture phase you can no longer form one fleet of the biggest ships possible and brawl in one system on one grid no matter how many times it is explained to them it wont work. Again, gg.
Seems like a thing that could happen on TQ TBH you know ententes not killing each other for a common goal?
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:[The entire environment is saturated with completely unrealistic things that are impossible on TQ now and even after the new sov system happens. PL were in Our normal TQ macs when we did your station last night whatGÇÖs really unrealistic is brave running round in Faction BS and dreads. PL has not done anything that technically we could not do on TQ so far We have AT ships we have dreads carriers and supers on TQ,
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: I would say please stop sending over spies to try and FC us to lose on purpose
ThatGÇÖs some super tinfoil right thereGǪ So to make it fare for you we are only going to come in things we OWN on TQ tonight when we take your stationGǪ just to make it fare for us can you just come in a tengu/eagle fleet like you have on TQ also.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 19:41:47 -
[179] - Quote
Tappits wrote:PL has not done anything that technically we could not do on TQ so far That's bullshit.
There is only 50 Chameleons that exist in the game. You guys were bring 60-70 at once and everyone knows PL does not own all 50 on TQ, much less 20 more that do not exist. Same deal with the rest of AT ships.
But I suspect that no matter how many of these facts are presented to you; the lies will continue to be vomited from your mouth.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Traxev
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 20:10:32 -
[180] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:PL has not done anything that technically we could not do on TQ so far That's bullshit.There is only 50 Chameleons that exist in the game. You guys were bring 60-70 at once and everyone knows PL does not own all 50 on TQ, much less 20 more that do not exist. Same deal with the rest of AT ships. But I suspect that no matter how many of these facts are presented to you; the lies will continue to be vomited from your mouth.
Its funny when you call bullshit then spew some more of it from your mouth. I was on the fleet all of last night and we barely had 40ish people in fleet. (which was a machariel fleet that included people bringing dreads, carriers, supers, titans, a hyena or two, so please explain how we brought 60-70 of them at once.
Also please explain to me why you think you should be able to undock endless amounts of orthruses to go sov grind then complain about us using AT ships. When was the last time BNI ran an orthrus fleet? When was the last time BNI could vomit them out of the station with no regards to their cost or availability? |
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 20:26:42 -
[181] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:PL has not done anything that technically we could not do on TQ so far That's bullshit.There is only 50 Chameleons that exist in the game. You guys were bring 60-70 at once and everyone knows PL does not own all 50 on TQ, much less 20 more that do not exist. Same deal with the rest of AT ships. But I suspect that no matter how many of these facts are presented to you; the lies will continue to be vomited from your mouth.
Hello i'm a Brave Pilot! I got told we were gonna rock and kill all bad guys in new sov but...
OMG 9UY is RF, we tried to form for that and we lost a TQ R64 and we lost also the timer on Duality!
Time to use my super weapon! Complaining about everything everywhere!
Seriously, this is not reddit.
You complain about AT ships, which you can buy same as us.
You complain about supers that we basically never used.
You complain about how Duality is unrealistic and then you field fleets that are worth more than 1 month of Brave SRP every day.
I can understand you are now completely lost in the URRR DURR PL but seriously, dont' start crying also against CCP just because you always have to find an excuse for how things goes. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 20:51:53 -
[182] - Quote
If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
107
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 21:02:24 -
[183] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you.
O no guys he called us out... i guess we should unseed all dreads carriers and faction ships while we are at it.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 21:23:06 -
[184] - Quote
Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you. O no guys he called us out... i guess we should unseed all dreads carriers and faction ships while we are at it. Not what I said at all. Stop with the straw-man fallacies.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 21:35:58 -
[185] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you.
I dare you to spend one day without whining about something, your life quality will prob increase a lot, all this anger don't make good to health. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
107
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 21:43:24 -
[186] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you. O no guys he called us out... i guess we should unseed all dreads carriers and faction ships while we are at it. Not what I said at all. Stop with the straw-man fallacies.
Its not straw-man.... you said it was unrealistic, i said fine lets make it 100% like TQ and now your like no that's not what i asked for....
I just cannot wait till we use our unseeded and officer fitted Adrestia fleet from our AT hanger that we moved down. |
Traxev
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 21:43:58 -
[187] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you. O no guys he called us out... i guess we should unseed all dreads carriers and faction ships while we are at it. Not what I said at all. Stop with the straw-man fallacies.
So wait if you if we use it, it is overpowered and shouldn't be seeded. If you use it its fair and balanced and should remain? |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
109
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:02:43 -
[188] - Quote
Traxev wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:If you're so confident you don't need the AT ships to win, support not having the AT ships seeded on Duality.
I dare you. O no guys he called us out... i guess we should unseed all dreads carriers and faction ships while we are at it. Not what I said at all. Stop with the straw-man fallacies. So wait if you if we use it, it is overpowered and shouldn't be seeded. If you use it its fair and balanced and should remain?
I guess he would like us to use ishtars for everything nbd to us. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:11:13 -
[189] - Quote
Traxev wrote:So wait if you if we use it, it is overpowered and shouldn't be seeded. If you use it its fair and balanced and should remain? I never said that either. What is wrong with you guys?
Regardless. This has quickly went from simple feedback; me saying the AT ships should be removed to create a more realistic environment, to a PL and Spectre circle jerk CTA.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
109
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:20:28 -
[190] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Traxev wrote:So wait if you if we use it, it is overpowered and shouldn't be seeded. If you use it its fair and balanced and should remain? I never said that either. What is wrong with you guys? Regardless. This has quickly went from simple feedback; me saying the AT ships should be removed to create a more realistic environment, to a PL and Spectre circle jerk CTA.
No we have been saying fine make it realistic and then you say "no that's not what i am saying" when we say yer remove all the dumb stuff, i have no idea what you want... i don't think you know what you want ether. |
|
Naughty Dred
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:26:05 -
[191] - Quote
Now i really hate to say anything that might be misconstrued as 'in defense of' pl but we have had a couple of minor/medium encounters with them in the last couple of days and so far they have not dropped anything i would consider completely ridiculous. An unnecessary marauder or 2 and yes the AT ships, but I killed a few of them with just 1 cynabal, so they cant be that awesome. And from the off Brave has been sat outside 9UY in carriers and dreads like carebears outside amarr, which would be fine if you weren't so god damn untidy... its tidy now though, Spectre tidied it up for you :)
Anyway everyone should stop bitching and embrace this brief bit of freedom from the servitude of the killboard. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:31:36 -
[192] - Quote
Tappits wrote:i have no idea what you want... i don't think you know what you want ether. I have been crystal clear from the start and I really don't know how to make it easier to understand: Remove the AT ships.
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
109
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:39:41 -
[193] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:i have no idea what you want... i don't think you know what you want ether. I have been crystal clear from the start and I really don't know how to make it easier to understand: Remove the AT ships.Is that simple enough for you to understand?
Fine... Slowcats supers titans TFI's and Ishtars for the nest few weeks then... have fun. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:42:55 -
[194] - Quote
Tappits wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:i have no idea what you want... i don't think you know what you want ether. I have been crystal clear from the start and I really don't know how to make it easier to understand: Remove the AT ships.Is that simple enough for you to understand? Fine... Slowcats supers titans TFI's and Ishtars for the nest few weeks then... have fun. Deal. I'll let the remaining 12 Brave pilots who still log into Duality know to leave the AT ships undocked. Don't forget to tell Spectre no AT ships is now part of their contract.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Traxev
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:49:16 -
[195] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Tappits wrote:i have no idea what you want... i don't think you know what you want ether. I have been crystal clear from the start and I really don't know how to make it easier to understand: Remove the AT ships.Is that simple enough for you to understand?
And we have been equally clear that by following your logic. Anything that is not viable on tranquility shouldn't be viable here. So naturally you shouldn't get 100 isk dreads or carriers, you shouldn't get 100 isk mauaraders or 100 isk orthruses. So go form up your eagle fleet we will have the full range of our ship docterines from tranquility at hand and after all that trouble you will still lose horribly.
So instead of making this terribly painful for all of us. Stop your complaining, enjoy the cheap ships allowing you to do things that you can't do on the normal server and have some fun. |
Jayne Fillon
723
|
Posted - 2015.06.21 22:55:51 -
[196] - Quote
Traxev wrote: ...and have some fun. Something ironic about that.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 03:43:25 -
[197] - Quote
I'd prefer a full AT PL everyday over a full slowcat and super fleet. The first you can fight - the second will just laugh at your damage while neuting and FB-ing you :)
That being said , I do feel the tnode capture timers are a bit long - even as defenders you will spend 2-3 hours every other day just because some guys decided to have some fun and RF an ihub or 10. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 03:50:47 -
[198] - Quote
i think the timer durations are starting to grow on me. i can see how a small coordinated defending force can fend off bigger attacking force if they focus on defending their pocket of space, which is something i really like. |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
42
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 04:04:00 -
[199] - Quote
Time to join the b**ch fest :D
While I may be in one of the smaller alliances participating in this, we have certainly been active. Agressed by most of the groups here and done our fair share of roaming too. So here is my 10 bobs worth:
1: Was a little hesitant about the time it was taking to defend but having spent a few days on it now its not that bad and I believe us little guys may just have a chance of having a little corner somewhere undesired.
2: Ship availability, dont change a thing. I have been around the block and back and can honestly say i see PL in non-AT ships a hell of a lot less than I see them in other ships. Seen more in Marauders tbf and only 3 AT ships in the whole time i have been on duality (from the day before competition started basically). As for the rest of the ships, it gives everyone a chance to see what they could be using on TQ but dont for the fear of loss to blob ganks etc. Yes we do use dreads and carriers on duality for pvp but in tq we use them for pve, its a pleasant change. and yes we use AT ships frequently but far from always.
3: Brave should join back up with TEST and be best friends again.
4: I have more points but having spent 18 of the last 24 hours on eve, i cant think and need my sleep. |
Shadoo
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
354
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 04:08:51 -
[200] - Quote
I like the idea of distributed style of capturing, encouraging smaller fleets of specialized make up to capture/defend stuff.
Not sure about the single large flashpoint culmination of ihub/tcu defense/offense when the new tcu/ihub is dropped though - if I was running defense, I'd probably just park a max numbers slowcat/super fleet at a planet and wait to drop a new ihub/tcu and hold the grid while the aggressors are running around in puny ships capping nodes and thus killing the old one. But maybe I'm just a cynic.
But, if you are going to still provide a single flashpoint for captures (as you currently are), why not also build in the system to support that and allow for tactical benefit? For example, provide more benefits in capturing adjacent non-station systems in a constellation and instead of spawning nodes everywhere in the constellation, only spawn nodes in the systems the defending alliance still holds sov. Allow us to siege the outlaying walls of the fortress, or go for the throat and attempt to overpower around the castle -- the choice is yours style... |
|
Jayne Fillon
727
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 04:11:48 -
[201] - Quote
Nevermind that, Shadoo is alive???
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
KristyDawn
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 05:23:09 -
[202] - Quote
What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
313
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 05:56:18 -
[203] - Quote
KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
YamiFreighter
Full Spectrum Inc Fidelas Constans
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 06:13:55 -
[204] - Quote
My experiences so far with Fozziesov are mixed as are my opinions.
The first part, where you entosis the structure and the structure is reinforced. If the enemy actively maintains the indexes the system takes quite a while to take. The maintained indexes also give them a more predictable window in which they must defend the area. Its the part of the game where you kick a nest of hornets and get ready to deal with what comes, be it blob warfare, a HAC fleet or an I don't give a damn cuz its out of my timezone response.
I like this part.
The second part, where you must essentially control the majority of the constellation while your alliance captures command nodes. This encourages unconventional tactics which I get a good laugh out of, even if the limitless isk and tournament ships do drain the fun out of it to a degree.
I like this part.
Then there is the last part, this part only applies to TCUs and IHUBs, where the structure is first destroyed and then you place your own down, you have essentially bested your adversary through two differently managed stages of the vulnerability timer. But the thing that's out of place here is that assuming you own the system, you can let the attackers do whatever they want in your system for the first two timers, right up until the end where they place their own structure down, and then hotdrop with overwhelming force as soon as they drop their structure down, losing pretty much nothing in the process, resetting the process, and achiving nothing but -1 sov structure for the attackers and the need to do it all again.
I think this part is absolutely no fun at all.
CCP Fozzie I believe it was mentioned somwhere that these sov mechanics were to enable to make smaller entities able to claim sov, but this last part not only goes against that, but gives the defenders ample time to prepare all the assets for the only part of the sov warfare that even matters. In fact I'll go as far as to say that at this point the other mechanics are simply hoops to be jumped through so that this final encounter may be attempted. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:00:53 -
[205] - Quote
YamiFreighter wrote:Then there is the last part, this part only applies to TCUs and IHUBs, where the structure is first destroyed and then you place your own down, you have essentially bested your adversary through two differently managed stages of the vulnerability timer. But the thing that's out of place here is that assuming you own the system, you can let the attackers do whatever they want in your system for the first two timers, right up until the end where they place their own structure down, and then hotdrop with overwhelming force as soon as they drop their structure down, losing pretty much nothing in the process, resetting the process, and achiving nothing but -1 sov structure for the attackers and the need to do it all again.
I think this part is absolutely no fun at all.
CCP Fozzie I believe it was mentioned somwhere that these sov mechanics were to enable to make smaller entities able to claim sov, but this last part not only goes against that, but gives the defenders ample time to prepare all the assets for the only part of the sov warfare that even matters. In fact I'll go as far as to say that at this point the other mechanics are simply hoops to be jumped through so that this final encounter may be attempted. I agree with what you said. If the final engagement can be simply won with hot dropping all the things on one grid, and winning the entire thing(?), how is that any better than dominion sov?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
KristyDawn
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:05:39 -
[206] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time.
That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:20:31 -
[207] - Quote
KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time. That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? PL seems to have taken a lot real fast and we are only four days into the competition. Please explain what I am missing?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
KristyDawn
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:28:18 -
[208] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time. That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? PL seems to have taken a lot real fast and we are only four days into the competition. Please explain what I am missing?
What does that have to do with the raffle system? We have taken a lot of systems because we have people capturing nodes almost 24/7. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:31:52 -
[209] - Quote
KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time. That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? PL seems to have taken a lot real fast and we are only four days into the competition. Please explain what I am missing? What does that have to do with the raffle system? We have taken a lot of systems because we have people capturing nodes almost 24/7. I'll give you some time to realize what you have said.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
KristyDawn
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:34:35 -
[210] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote: It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time.
That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? PL seems to have taken a lot real fast and we are only four days into the competition. Please explain what I am missing? What does that have to do with the raffle system? We have taken a lot of systems because we have people capturing nodes almost 24/7. I'll give you some time to realize what you have said.
I think you have a poor understanding of pretty much everything :) |
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:57:08 -
[211] - Quote
KristyDawn wrote:I think you have a poor understanding of pretty much everything :) With the raffle it means anyone in the contest has a shot to win something, despite some alliances teaming up to form these coalitions. It means that there is incentive to keep trying to use the sov system instead of just giving up early on. If that was not the case then you would have four alliances team up and crush everyone else immediately and then there really isn't any test of this new sov system. Just four alliances who napped up and everyone else stopped logging into Duality to test it. To uncover bugs and adjust timer lengths. You know, the main reason for all of this stuff.
I guess I'm not explaining things well enough. I'll leave it to CCP to explain why there is a raffle if they feel like they need to.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 07:57:42 -
[212] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:What was the reasoning for rewarding the meta module names via a raffle instead of basing it on the top 4 alliances that captured the most sov? It would mean no one would do anything till the end. This way there is incentive to do the sov stuff the entire time. That makes no sense, starting early ensures the most systems captured. You don't know how long it takes to take a large amount of systems do you? PL seems to have taken a lot real fast and we are only four days into the competition. Please explain what I am missing?
i think you'll find that trying to capture systems that someone is actively defending will be much harder than capturing systems now. so if you are waiting till the last moment you might be in for a surprise |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 08:00:07 -
[213] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:I think you have a poor understanding of pretty much everything :) With the raffle it means anyone in the contest has a shot to win something, despite some alliances teaming up to form these coalitions. It means that there is incentive to keep trying to use the sov system instead of just giving up early on. If that was not the case then you would have four alliances team up and crush everyone else immediately and then there really isn't any test of this new sov system. Just four alliances who napped up and everyone else stopped logging into Duality to test it. To uncover bugs and such. You know, the main reason for all of this stuff. I guess I'm not explaining things well enough. I'll leave it to CCP to explain why there is a raffle if they feel like they need to.
the way it is now some alliances didn't even bother to login. |
Hippolyte Clio
Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 08:04:30 -
[214] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:I think you have a poor understanding of pretty much everything :) With the raffle it means anyone in the contest has a shot to win something, despite some alliances teaming up to form these coalitions. It means that there is incentive to keep trying to use the sov system instead of just giving up early on. If that was not the case then you would have four alliances team up and crush everyone else immediately and then there really isn't any test of this new sov system. Just four alliances who napped up and everyone else stopped logging into Duality to test it. To uncover bugs and such. You know, the main reason for all of this stuff. I guess I'm not explaining things well enough. I'll leave it to CCP to explain why there is a raffle if they feel like they need to.
People could do that now if they wanted and just share the systems 4 way for the maximum chance to win. But currently in this test there is only 3 or 4 groups actually playing.
Only 1 alliance has actually tried to make deals with people and that was brave. Lychton blued Fcon, tried to blue darkness but they aren't playing and tried to blue PL but said no. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 08:12:22 -
[215] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:KristyDawn wrote:I think you have a poor understanding of pretty much everything :) With the raffle it means anyone in the contest has a shot to win something, despite some alliances teaming up to form these coalitions. It means that there is incentive to keep trying to use the sov system instead of just giving up early on. If that was not the case then you would have four alliances team up and crush everyone else immediately and then there really isn't any test of this new sov system. Just four alliances who napped up and everyone else stopped logging into Duality to test it. To uncover bugs and such. You know, the main reason for all of this stuff. I guess I'm not explaining things well enough. I'll leave it to CCP to explain why there is a raffle if they feel like they need to. the way it is now some alliances didn't even bother to login. Ha! You don't have to tell me. I currently make up 1/3 of the active membership on Duality for Brave. The other two members are AFK right now. And that was while you guys were taking the 9UY station. But it wasn't this new sov system that caused the participation to drop to nothing. Just tons of meta gaming done by the enemies and the standard Brave drama. Factor in some of the other alliances that were complete no shows for this thing. I think there is only 4-5 alliances doing anything now. Damn shame really. I really want this new sov system to be firing on all cylinders when it hits TQ. Everyone has endured I don't know how many years of soul destroying Dominion sov, a new system that is amazing is what they deserve. I don't care about winning, I just want what is best for the game and the players. But alas, I am just a few months in the game and what I can do with just me and maybe a couple other guys to kick the tires on this new sov is insanely limited.
I'm trying to find us a couple different approaches to things, but when no one logs in, it feels like solo PvP where the other guy has two Falcon alts, links, pirate implants and three triage Archons on standby to save his officer fit faction battleship. And me? I'm in an Atron.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Shadoo
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
356
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 09:05:34 -
[216] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I'm trying to find us a couple different approaches to things, but when no one logs in, it feels like solo PvP where the other guy has two Falcon alts, links, pirate implants and three triage Archons on standby to save his officer fit faction battleship. And me? I'm in an Atron.
From what I've seen - Orthus is the BRAVE standard issue ship on Duality :)
I'm happy to come guest FC few defense ops if that helps? |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 09:15:15 -
[217] - Quote
Shadoo wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I'm trying to find us a couple different approaches to things, but when no one logs in, it feels like solo PvP where the other guy has two Falcon alts, links, pirate implants and three triage Archons on standby to save his officer fit faction battleship. And me? I'm in an Atron. From what I've seen - Orthus is the BRAVE standard issue ship on Duality :) I'm happy to come guest FC few defense ops if that helps? Appreciate the offer, but there is almost no one left to FC. And I don't think another FC from Spectre would go over very well. What we need, aside from members logging in, is new skirmish FC's who are capable of leading a small squad. Get a dozen of those guys on along with whatever ships they like to skirmish with and we would have something. Then again, if we could get about 10 of you well know people to each FC a small group, I have seen you all on Duality, it would be pretty amazing boost.
Oh well, have to call it a night. I fear that tomorrow when I log in, I will be by myself. But by all that is holy, I will still try and take a node so watch your six!
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Dorijan
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 10:31:30 -
[218] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Shadoo wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:I'm trying to find us a couple different approaches to things, but when no one logs in, it feels like solo PvP where the other guy has two Falcon alts, links, pirate implants and three triage Archons on standby to save his officer fit faction battleship. And me? I'm in an Atron. From what I've seen - Orthus is the BRAVE standard issue ship on Duality :) I'm happy to come guest FC few defense ops if that helps? Appreciate the offer, but there is almost no one left to FC. And I don't think another FC from Spectre would go over very well. What we need, aside from members logging in, is new skirmish FC's who are capable of leading a small squad. Get a dozen of those guys on along with whatever ships they like to skirmish with and we would have something. Then again, if we could get about 10 of you well know people to each FC a small group, I have seen you all on Duality, it would be pretty amazing boost. Oh well, have to call it a night. I fear that tomorrow when I log in, I will be by myself. But by all that is holy, I will still try and take a node so watch your six!
Could we please stay on topic? This was supposed to be a thread about fozziesov playtesting, not some alliance's issues on TQ or Duality. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13003
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 10:40:17 -
[219] - Quote
The raffle system is intended to make sure that people have incentive to get and hold as many systems as they can, even if they know that they won't get enough to be in the top 4.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
95
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:02:32 -
[220] - Quote
Hippolyte Clio wrote:Only 1 alliance has actually tried to make deals with people and that was brave. Lychton blued Fcon, tried to blue darkness but they aren't playing and tried to blue PL but they said no. This right here is why Brave will never amount to anything in this game. If your knee-jerk reaction is to blue everything around you then you are forever stuck in the mindset of your own inability. Yes, you can hold a lot of space that way, but at the end of the day you are just doing it wrong. |
|
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
45
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:13:13 -
[221] - Quote
someone lend me a titan for this contest please? the lols will be epic and the drama supreme....... (im being serious, can i borrow a titan?) |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:30:25 -
[222] - Quote
I know we need to stay on topic but its interesting that Brave are not complaining about the sov mechanic so much as how they are coping with it... I have to say the first couple of days we got hammered by Brave who were more than happy to drop big shiny expensive **** on us in an attempt to take our station.... numbers will be critical in both attacking and defending under the new sov or should I say well organised and focused numbers in specialised ships with support...
As for Brave needing to reach out and form 'coalitions' with all the other big players on duality well just how big do you need to be to survive and thrive under the new sov system? We've formed a couple of strategic partnerships with like minded allies rather than try to blue everyone because we like to PvP but we know the value in mutual support and how important it is to have friends you can 'trust' in this 'game' |
Dorijan
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
59
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 11:48:09 -
[223] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:I know we need to stay on topic but its interesting that Brave are not complaining about the sov mechanic so much as how they are coping with it... I have to say the first couple of days we got hammered by Brave who were more than happy to drop big shiny expensive **** on us in an attempt to take our station.... numbers will be critical in both attacking and defending under the new sov or should I say well organised and focused numbers in specialised ships with support...
As for Brave needing to reach out and form 'coalitions' with all the other big players on duality well just how big do you need to be to survive and thrive under the new sov system? We've formed a couple of strategic partnerships with like minded allies rather than try to blue everyone because we like to PvP but we know the value in mutual support and how important it is to have friends you can 'trust' in this 'game'
Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships. |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 12:14:55 -
[224] - Quote
Dorijan wrote:
Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships.
SPAI!!!!! |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13003
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 12:18:04 -
[225] - Quote
Latest set of timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing YWS0-Z IHub Brave Collective 5.6 Ongoing YWS0-Z TCU Brave Collective 5.6 Ongoing 5KG-PY Station Freeport Freeport 1 Ongoing AY-24I IHub Q Alliance 4.3 Ongoing I7S-1S Station Freeport Freeport 1 Ongoing ZQ-Z3Y Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.22 15:11 2V-CS5 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.22 15:35 H9-J8N Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.22 17:05 D-6WS1 Station Fidelas Constans 4.1 2015.06.22 17:11 J6QB-P Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.22 22:51 C1-HAB Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 00:36 AY-24I Station Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 00:41 YQB-22 Station Brave Collective 4.3 2015.06.23 00:47 AY-24I TCU Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 01:12 18XA-C TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 2015.06.23 01:29 TXJ-II Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 02:25 TA3T-3 TCU Brave Collective 2.7 2015.06.23 02:49 TA3T-3 IHub Brave Collective 2.7 2015.06.23 03:30 9UY4-H IHub Brave Collective 6 2015.06.23 07:15 3GXF-U IHub Fidelas Constans 4.5 2015.06.23 07:50 GA9P-0 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 08:06 QBL-BV Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 09:29 YWS0-Z Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM IHub Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM Station Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM TCU Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 11:02 18-GZM TCU Affirmative. 4.7 2015.06.23 11:10 1-1I53 IHub Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 11:19 18-GZM IHub Affirmative. 4.7 2015.06.23 11:27 1-1I53 TCU Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 11:29 1-1I53 Station Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 12:01 MVCJ-E IHub Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 12:12 2-TEGJ Station Q Alliance 6
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:10:58 -
[226] - Quote
Dorijan wrote: Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships.
Yeah probably a bit more information than I'm comfortable sharing
But we looked for mutually beneficial partnerships before the fighting started... |
Apex Aubaris
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
5
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:14:35 -
[227] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Dorijan wrote: Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships.
Yeah probably a bit more information than I'm comfortable sharing But we looked for mutually beneficial partnerships before the fighting started...
But then again the guy that made the deal with you is in the same corp as Dorijan
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:18:52 -
[228] - Quote
Apex Aubaris wrote:Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Dorijan wrote: Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships.
Yeah probably a bit more information than I'm comfortable sharing But we looked for mutually beneficial partnerships before the fighting started... But then again the guy that made the deal with you is in the same corp as Dorijan
I'm just trying to aid your internal comms processes |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:43:33 -
[229] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Apex Aubaris wrote:Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Dorijan wrote: Out of curiosity, how many people do you have testing on Duality and how many BRAVE nerds showed up at your doorstep? Kinda interested in the numbers that made you form strategic partnerships.
Yeah probably a bit more information than I'm comfortable sharing But we looked for mutually beneficial partnerships before the fighting started... But then again the guy that made the deal with you is in the same corp as Dorijan I'm just trying to aid your internal comms processes
Its a spy spying on a spy that's spying on spy spying on a dream
Spyception |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
28
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:46:39 -
[230] - Quote
Ok I'm done putting my filth on the forum I have a serious idea about the UI for capping SOV with Entosis would it be possible to use a shape other than a circle if there is not going to be a numerical system or percentage system, specifically a dodecagon because it is much easier to say what fraction of 12 you have done then trying to eyeball about where around the circle you are.
Base 12 is superior to base 10
|
|
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S Affirmative.
418
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 13:56:04 -
[231] - Quote
The biggest issue that I'm having at the moment is telling what is happening on a Constellation/Region level, the old system this was actually fairly easy to tell. Open the Sov window, and click on the constellation tab, and everything in a nice neat table.
The other thing that has been bugging me is the inability to tell WHO has sov on the system that I'm currently in, the usual location for this information, has the 3 Sov identifiers, but this really sucks when they all have the Default Alliance Icon, you can't tell at a glance which alliance it is, can we have this information in text please? |
Parley Queen
Dimensional Drift
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 14:54:40 -
[232] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:Ok I'm done putting my filth on the forum I have a serious idea about the UI for capping SOV with Entosis would it be possible to use a shape other than a circle if there is not going to be a numerical system or percentage system, specifically a dodecagon because it is much easier to say what fraction of 12 you have done then trying to eyeball about where around the circle you are.
Base 12 is superior to base 10
Are you sure you understand radix? Because how you wrote that I cant see how people would be better off if you only had to capture (84)base12 instead of (100)base10. I think you mean highly composite numbers?
I understand what you are saying and agree that a hexagonal shape is easier and more accurate than eyeballing the progress on a circle. Dodecagons are nice but they bring more resolution than needed.
"FC I am 1/12 in my cycle" = "I just started" "FC I am 4/12 finished here" = "Im a 30% done" "FC I am 11/12 done" = "Im almost done" |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 16:59:27 -
[233] - Quote
What is the estimated presence of players in a system when looking at the defensive multipliers?
Notifications being game wide feels a bit too much. Is there a slider in place to lower this to region, constellation or even system wide instead?
As others have said, there should be a way to easily see how long it will take to attack and defend the things we Entosis. The UI icon or even the health bar on it changing should give an indication. In minutes and seconds. Or a percentage complete.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 20:09:30 -
[234] - Quote
Liking the clearer UI (in terms of vulnerability) from the patch.
I know it's only Monday. but any word on the Ihub thing (upgrades?)
P.s I've playing since Feb 2004, and this is the first time I've actually started to "get into" sov, apart from one minor incident on TQ, in Tenerifis....
(i.e. that's a +1 on what you're doing, from a crusty old fart... )
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 20:15:19 -
[235] - Quote
This may be a stupid question (apologies if so...) - can you remove one of your own TCU's? (i.e. to be able to drop another)
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
32
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 21:20:12 -
[236] - Quote
I have a suggestion about the degrading defence bonus's... there is no way we are going to put time and effort into mining and ratting on duality while our priority is to do it on TQ for obvious reasons... but this just means our window of vulnerability will just get wider and wider.. which is unrealistic...
If you lose sov and the strategic index is reset then so be it... but if you are successfully holding on its too big an ask to also practically live on Duality to keep everything ticking over...
So is there any chance they can be 'frozen'?
Edit: this is a test of the sov mechanics after all not an opportunity to 'play house' |
Dreamer Targaryen
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 22:03:45 -
[237] - Quote
The system "YWS0-Z" is somehow bugged: - When you are in the system, you are unable to see the HUD (systeminfo, route, opportunities) - The status was: freeported station, brave ihub, no tcu. - After putting up a tcu and activating my entosis-module on it, I went through the warmup-cycle, then the 10min capture-time (white arrow-circle) and after that nothing happened. The tcu seems to be still owned by Concorde and my module is still cycling without doing anything. (De-activating and re-trying to entosify it had no effect either.) - The sovereign-tab of the system is blank. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 22:38:10 -
[238] - Quote
Quote:Kaphrah > =localsvc:service=publicQaToolsClient&method=MoveMeTo&destination=amarr>http://s7.directupload.net/images/140719/72o3mnuz.jpg rekt This sort of behaviour is douche baggery on the test server to say the least..... we're all here to test the new system and find bugs, not have some nobba doing this.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.22 23:37:10 -
[239] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Quote:Kaphrah > =localsvc:service=publicQaToolsClient&method=MoveMeTo&destination=amarr>http://s7.directupload.net/images/140719/72o3mnuz.jpg rekt This sort of behaviour is douche baggery on the test server to say the least..... we're all here to test the new system and find bugs, not have some nobba doing this. We have been reporting that person as well as others doing that. There is also those who have been buying up all the strontium and Entosis links. I added them to my address book and as of last night they were still doing these things against the rules. I don't know why they have not been banned yet.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13017
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 00:07:53 -
[240] - Quote
Latest timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.06.23 00:36 AY-24I Station Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 00:41 YQB-22 Station Brave Collective 4.3 2015.06.23 00:47 AY-24I TCU Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 01:12 18XA-C TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 2015.06.23 01:29 TXJ-II Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 02:25 TA3T-3 TCU Brave Collective 2.7 2015.06.23 02:49 TA3T-3 IHub Brave Collective 2.7 2015.06.23 03:30 9UY4-H IHub Brave Collective 6 2015.06.23 07:15 3GXF-U IHub Fidelas Constans 4.5 2015.06.23 07:50 GA9P-0 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 08:06 QBL-BV Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 09:29 YWS0-Z Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM IHub Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM Station Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 10:33 FX-7EM TCU Eastasia Alliance 6 2015.06.23 11:02 18-GZM TCU Affirmative. 4.7 2015.06.23 11:10 1-1I53 IHub Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 11:19 18-GZM IHub Affirmative. 4.7 2015.06.23 11:27 1-1I53 TCU Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 11:29 1-1I53 Station Affirmative. 6 2015.06.23 12:01 MVCJ-E IHub Q Alliance 4.3 2015.06.23 12:12 2-TEGJ Station Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 12:47 2-TEGJ TCU Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 13:07 BK4-YC TCU Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 13:18 2-TEGJ IHub Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 15:15 BK4-YC Station Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 15:26 3GXF-U Station Suddenly Spaceships. 4.5 2015.06.23 15:39 BK4-YC IHub Q Alliance 6 2015.06.23 16:41 D-GTMI IHub Pandemic Legion 1 2015.06.23 18:12 7MD-S1 TCU Praetorian Directorate 4.7 2015.06.23 18:15 7MD-S1 IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.7 2015.06.23 18:22 7MD-S1 Station Praetorian Directorate 4.7 2015.06.23 18:28 S25C-K IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.9 2015.06.23 18:31 ERVK-P TCU Praetorian Directorate 5.3 2015.06.23 18:54 D-GTMI TCU Pandemic Legion 1.6 2015.06.23 19:00 D-GTMI Station Pandemic Legion 1.6 2015.06.23 19:50 T-RPFU Station Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.23 19:51 T-RPFU TCU Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.23 19:56 T-RPFU IHub Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.23 20:03 UL-7I8 IHub Pandemic Legion 4.8 2015.06.23 20:19 D-6WS1 Station Fidelas Constans 3 2015.06.23 20:23 8P9-BM TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 4.8 2015.06.23 20:23 8P9-BM IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 4.8 2015.06.23 20:26 D-6WS1 TCU Fidelas Constans 3 2015.06.23 21:01 D-6WS1 IHub Fidelas Constans 3 2015.06.23 21:12 VKI-T7 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.7 2015.06.23 21:19 8P9-BM Station Suddenly Spaceships. 4.8 2015.06.23 21:56 3GXF-U TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 3.5 2015.06.23 22:06 H-GKI6 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 4.4 2015.06.23 22:11 49GC-R Station Brave Collective 2 2015.06.23 22:12 H-GKI6 TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 4.4 2015.06.23 23:01 49GC-R TCU Brave Collective 2 2015.06.23 23:07 49GC-R IHub Brave Collective 2 2015.06.23 23:22 F-YH5B Station Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.23 23:39 &...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
vampire Huunuras
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
11
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 00:08:12 -
[241] - Quote
CCP Fozzie ... PL are being meanies :(. They didn't like us trying to take their sov. I mean we are only trying to freeport it :).
https://i.gyazo.com/577a6c00fbd7a8386d134f5e250908b9.png
[DEQC] Become content
http://i.imgur.com/IfcOCoj.jpg
|
Jayne Fillon
730
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 02:15:14 -
[242] - Quote
When will the RF timers be set back to normal, instead of the 24 hours RF cycle that is currently in place?
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 02:36:50 -
[243] - Quote
when we finish capturing all the sov |
JackWatts
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 09:28:38 -
[244] - Quote
I've been trying to go through this thread and see what bugs have been reported and what suggestions have been offered about the actual SOV system but all I am getting is a headache.
I don't know about other people but I don't really have the patience to go through 100 posts about how BRAVE is blueing everyone and how PL drops a titan at the drop of a hat just to see what has been written about the actual SOV system.
Can someone from CCP please create another topic for Playtest discussions/general whining about how "PL is crushing everyone" and keep this thread for actual Bug Reports/suggestions and improvements.
Or the other way around since it seems 80% of this thread is already filled with anything but what should be in here. |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
32
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 09:53:13 -
[245] - Quote
Could we have some kind of clear graphic that shows counter entosis'ing (is that a word!!) different colours for the streams or something |
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 11:48:50 -
[246] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Could we have some kind of clear graphic that shows counter entosis'ing (is that a word!!) different colours for the streams or something
Don't cross the streams!!! |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
447
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 12:13:47 -
[247] - Quote
On the solar system show info window, sovereignty tab, I like how it now states clearly "Station secure" or "Station vulnerable now".
However, there is no way to see what the vulnerability time window is for the system now. Also, the displaying of the current time followed by a timer that is always starting at two hours continues to cause confusion.
Since we'll be able to set individual structures/systems to vulnerability windows other than the alliance-wide default, it would be nice if you could see what the vulnerability window is on those individual structures when you show info on them. For example, when I show info on a TCU, there is no information whatsoever about its current status or vulnerability window. Of course, that shows in the upper left corner, but it'd be nice if it displayed on the show info of those structures individually, too.
REALLY REALLY miss seeing who "owns" a system across the top left corner by the system name, like it is on TQ now, especially when roaming. Ya, I know, just hover over any of the three sov icons, but it's just not as efficient as simply glancing at the upper left.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
448
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 13:51:21 -
[248] - Quote
Quote:The names of every alliance that participates in this testing event (by capturing at least one system within the competition area) will be listed in the description of the Entosis Link I blueprint,
Clarification, please. By "capturing at least one system" do you mean any one sov structure, or only at least one TCU, or all three sov structures in a system?
In other words, what exactly do you mean by "at least one system"?
Thanks!
GG
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Zibru Povens
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:09:47 -
[249] - Quote
Greygal wrote:Quote:The names of every alliance that participates in this testing event (by capturing at least one system within the competition area) will be listed in the description of the Entosis Link I blueprint, Clarification, please. By "capturing at least one system" do you mean any one sov structure, or only at least one TCU, or all three sov structures in a system? In other words, what exactly do you mean by "at least one system"? Thanks! GG
I'm sure if you talk to the right people you'll get the chance of 'capturing' all 3 structures of a system. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:14:35 -
[250] - Quote
Also do u get points for holding your own systems, or do you need to capture someone's?
|
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
448
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:34:18 -
[251] - Quote
On Corporation Window, Alliance Tab, Systems sub-tab, would be nice if the status of any/all sov structures in each owned system were displayed there. Also, on this tab, please make it columnar so we can sort by system name and region, and add constellation column.
(I'm assuming the Corporation Window, Alliance Tab, Sovereignty sub-tab is meant to display all sov regardless of owner, not just your own sov, but hard to say for certain since it still contains fake data. If this tab will eventually only show your own sov structures, then ignore my first comment above).
I'd kill for an actual countdown timer on the green circles when entosising something...
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
448
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 14:40:58 -
[252] - Quote
Zibru Povens wrote:I'm sure if you talk to the right people you'll get the chance of 'capturing' all 3 structures of a system.
lol the problem isn't capturing the systems, it's finding vulnerable systems to attack ... the current UI (or lack thereof) makes it kind of a pita :) Fozzie's list (which is fabulous) is often out of date by the time I log on (I'm mostly active Aussie time zone), so I spend the first 20-30 minutes logged on trying to determine the status of potential systems (for example, quite often the systems on Fozzie's list I'd be most interested in chasing nodes on, have already been taken over by the time I log on).
Or find myself accidentally helping someone else take over an ihub or tcu because they were capturing nodes at the same time we were That was actually very funny.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
618
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 16:13:26 -
[253] - Quote
Hey everyone, thanks for all your feedback and testing so far, its been really invaluable, and we're taking all feedback into account even if we haven't had time to reply to it all!
Just want to let you know that we are planning a special mass test on Duality on Thursday, June 25th, at 17:00 UTC (= EVE time), and let you know how this affects the wargames.
Important: The sovereignty playtest in Providence and Catch will be paused from 16:30 until 18:30 on Thursday, June 25th - CCP will enforce this and if necessary revert any progress made during this time.
What exactly is being tested? Sovereignty changes Server and client performance
Test steps: Probably similar to following, systems will be decided later:
Meet in system WWW (outside of target constellation) - We will add this system to the /moveme command Mass jump into XXX (in target constellation) Spread out over the whole constellation in small groups and capture as many sites as possible Jump to system YYY and warp to station Reinforce station with MANY entosis links - no PVP Start PVP after several minutes (wait for the command by CCP) Ceasefire (optimally when station is reinforced) and warp away Spread out over the whole constellation Capture the freeport in ZZZ - combat allowed - free for all!
What else should I know?
- Bring appropriate ships for sov warfare - Please fit Entosis Links if possible.
- Fleets will be mostly player organized, but there will also be a CCP organized fleet
- For moving to the test system - use /moveme
- 2M Skill points will be awarded on both Singularity and Duality for this mass test
- We will reactivate moveme for each wargame constellation for 30 minutes after the test ends, to allow people to return.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 16:18:54 -
[254] - Quote
Greygal wrote:Zibru Povens wrote:I'm sure if you talk to the right people you'll get the chance of 'capturing' all 3 structures of a system. lol the problem isn't capturing the systems, it's finding vulnerable systems to attack ... the current UI (or lack thereof) makes it kind of a pita :) Fozzie's list (which is fabulous) is often out of date by the time I log on (I'm mostly active Aussie time zone), so I spend the first 20-30 minutes logged on trying to determine the status of potential systems (for example, quite often the systems on Fozzie's list I'd be most interested in chasing nodes on, have already been taken over by the time I log on). Or find myself accidentally helping someone else take over an ihub or tcu because they were capturing nodes at the same time we were That was actually very funny. If you show info on the alliance that owns the system under the attributes tab, it lists the default vulnerability time. But it seems to not be working as they all show 02:00. I imagine this will be functional when it goes live on TQ, but like you said, there is no clear indication outside of flying to each system and mousing over the three icons.
I'm a bit torn on how easy this information should be easily available. On one hand it would be neat if there was some color system that showed variations between green and red to indicate at a quick glance what systems are getting closer and closer to being vulnerable. Closer and closer to solid green to represent the exact opposite of the vulnerable window.
On the other hand hitting F10 and the game telling you where to go without much effort beyond hitting the one key feels a bit too easy with valuable information with no effort. Maybe if the player was physically in the region or constellation, then when you look at the map, you get the color system. Quick glance and you can see what you would find interesting and then a mouse over the system in question would show a detailed break down of the TCU, I-hub and station times and owner.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
448
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 17:03:10 -
[255] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: If you show info on the alliance that owns the system under the attributes tab, it lists the default vulnerability time. But it seems to not be working as they all show 02:00. I imagine this will be functional when it goes live on TQ, but like you said, there is no clear indication outside of flying to each system and mousing over the three icons.
I'm a bit torn on how easy this information should be easily available. On one hand it would be neat if there was some color system that showed variations between green and red to indicate at a quick glance what systems are getting closer and closer to being vulnerable. Closer and closer to solid green to represent the exact opposite of the vulnerable window.
On the other hand hitting F10 and the game telling you where to go without much effort beyond hitting the one key feels a bit too easy with valuable information with no effort. Maybe if the player was physically in the region or constellation, then when you look at the map, you get the color system. Quick glance and you can see what you would find interesting and then a mouse over the system in question would show a detailed break down of the TCU, I-hub and station times and owner.
That's odd... show-info on alliances always shows 10:00 to me, which is our default vulnerability window. Is your default vulnerability window 02:00 by chance?
You don't realize how much you use and depend on Dotlan until you can't use it, WTB Dotlan for Duality!
I used to be unsure and somewhat torn, like you, about how accessible vulnerability and reinforcement/contested timers should be, but now that I've played around with it both as attacker and defender, I'm TOTALLY for this information being as accessible as possible. It's my understanding much of this information will be available via CREST, and I imagine many fabulous tools will be built using the CREST endpoint. When I'm having to show-info on individual systems I own just to figure out what's going on in my own space, there's a data accessibility issue.
On TQ, we use the map to find out where people are hanging out, where fights are happening, and more. When we roam, we head to all the big red spots on the map, 'cause that's where we're going to find the fights, find targets, get whelped, get blueballed, whatever. Where there are people, there is (potential) content.
With Fozziesov, that remains true, except people will be both more concentrated and more spread out, which excites me as it relates to roaming, whether in a small internal gang or one of my NewBro or other public roams. We should find more opportunities for fun fights, more often, when roaming null. Assuming they don't destroy fleetwarp, but that's for another thread....
Even though this is a testing situation we're playing in on Duality, you can see that happening already - people staying close to home, but also spread throughout their own constellation or territory, more than I see typically on TQ when roaming.
I do believe the default vulnerability timers and all other sov timers need to be accessible because we're going from a system where you can attack anyone, anytime, to a system where you can only attack someone during the time they determine. The widening vulnerability window means that, as indexes drop, we in the Aussie/Oceanic time zone will have a lot more systems available for us to mess with, attack, or otherwise harass, but we'll still have far fewer systems available for us to attack than other prime time zones. That means we'll have to roam far and wide to find content; having the sov related timers accessible via CREST or in-game map will help better prepare and plan roams, as knowing who is vulnerable during our active times helps us know where to roam to find content.
There's other reasons for the timers to be accessible, but I've already exceeded my monthly wall-of-text quota
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
448
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 17:31:32 -
[256] - Quote
Some random thoughts/impressions....
- I still keep undocking without stront... despite this failure on my part, I think adding stront to the entosis link was a great idea. I've already seen it developing into a "very important support role" for my newer/lower skilled pilots, and they seem to get a kick out of running around jetting stront to people as they sit there sov mining for an hour on a single node
- There is a definite rock-paper-scissors-Spock element to the new sov system. Station service gets attacked by an assault frigate, I undock a Rook to jam him/her off, his/her buddy undocks in a Golem ... I die.... In fact, I suspect we're going to see mauraders in particular used as entosis link ships a lot on TQ.
- Station services may need to be rethought. It is my understanding that the reason you can knock station services offline at any time is, well, to provide content, to pick a fight. That's not happening. Instead, more often than not, they just ignore you as you knock their station services offline, wait for you to leave, then undock and reset their station services. They are not only too easy to knock offline, they are too easy to get back online. As it is right now, it seems like station services is just an annoyance (although it is funny to see people run around trying to catch you as you hit their services, it's occasionally an effective way to split a defending force up around their constellation).
- While I believe and agree that actively owned and used systems should have strong defensive bonuses/activity bonuses, I think the bonuses are too strong. 60 minutes to take a single command node is torture, even more so when it's not contested. If I want the mind-numbing boredom of mining, I'll go mine rocks in a belt.
- I also think the spawning of the command nodes needs to be rethought, because as it is right now, who brings the most pilots "wins," and I don't think that's necessarily how it's intended. Right now, when a reinforcement timer ends, five command nodes are spawned. If you have greater numbers than the other side, the odds of you getting one of your people onto those five command nodes first is high. If you get on all five of the initially spawned command nodes first, then opposing side has no command nodes to grab to counter you. You then have to wait for one of those nodes to be captured, before another one spawns, and hope you get on it before they do. An attacking (or defending) force can, with enough people, shut the other side out of any realistic chance of capturing nodes for themselves. Imagine the futility of a 50 pilot alliance trying to capture nodes against a 2,000 pilot alliance... you don't even have a chance to sneak one in under the gun! They can, of course, shoot you, or link up on the same node to halt your progress, but that's not the point I'm trying to make The point I'm trying to make is I think that the spawning of command nodes needs to be more random right from the beginning, and throughout the capture event. Otherwise, regardless of defensive bonuses, we're just going to have the same blobfare style of warfare we already have right now, just spread out over a constellation instead of a single system. (Yes, I know, there's just no way to ever get away from who brings the most people wins stuff, but we can mitigate and lessen it, can't we?)
- Any fears that capitals would be useless under FozzieSov are laid to rest. If anything, they may be even more used.
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 20:13:12 -
[257] - Quote
What of adjacent systems that are not under the alliances control limits the cap on the defensive multiplier? It would add a bit mor 'terrain' to the area and mean that these border systems are softer targets and easier to Entosis, time wise?
Example: your alliance has dog in system A. System A is connected to systems B, C and D. You also have sov in systems C and D, but someone else has system B. That means the system defensive multiplier caps at 5. If you take sov in system B then the cap for system A is back to the max of 6 multiplier.
But let's say instead you lost sov in systems C and D. That means system A is capped at 3 multiplier because the 3 systems connected to it your alliance does not have sov in.
I hope I didn't make that sound complicated. Thought?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 20:40:10 -
[258] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:What of adjacent systems that are not under the alliances control limits the cap on the defensive multiplier? It would add a bit mor 'terrain' to the area and mean that these border systems are softer targets and easier to Entosis, time wise?
Example: your alliance has dog in system A. System A is connected to systems B, C and D. You also have sov in systems C and D, but someone else has system B. That means the system defensive multiplier caps at 5. If you take sov in system B then the cap for system A is back to the max of 6 multiplier.
But let's say instead you lost sov in systems C and D. That means system A is capped at 3 multiplier because the 3 systems connected to it your alliance does not have sov in.
I hope I didn't make that sound complicated. Thought?
i understood almost all the words.... but my brain hurts now |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
620
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 21:08:34 -
[259] - Quote
Hey all,
just a quick update, we're aware that an issue with capture times not taking into account a systems Activity Defense Multiplier have cropped up again. We've fixed the problem locally and will be updating the server with a new build as soon as its ready (Should only be a couple of hours now) .
Additionally this build should also resolve some of the other known issues, including problems with installing upgrades in Ihubs.
Stay tuned!
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 21:14:46 -
[260] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:What of adjacent systems that are not under the alliances control limits the cap on the defensive multiplier? It would add a bit mor 'terrain' to the area and mean that these border systems are softer targets and easier to Entosis, time wise?
Example: your alliance has dog in system A. System A is connected to systems B, C and D. You also have sov in systems C and D, but someone else has system B. That means the system defensive multiplier caps at 5. If you take sov in system B then the cap for system A is back to the max of 6 multiplier.
But let's say instead you lost sov in systems C and D. That means system A is capped at 3 multiplier because the 3 systems connected to it your alliance does not have sov in.
I hope I didn't make that sound complicated. Thought? i understood almost all the words.... but my brain hurts now EDIT: being serious though... it must not be too complicated to explain... even if the background mechanics are clever and worthy of discussion to the front line grunt, and i count myself amongst them, i need to know in simple terms what i need to do to win the objective... How about this:
For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 21:17:25 -
[261] - Quote
Our vulnernability window seems to be broken... it isnt switching back to invulnerable... it was late last night but its about 45 mins later than it should be tonight |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 21:18:14 -
[262] - Quote
[quote
For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one.[/quote]
That i understood thanks |
Blaed Drwd
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.23 21:35:38 -
[263] - Quote
Here's a thought. I understand that the DEVs are still sorting things with the displayed info in system windows and such and that there's mass confusion about what is vulnerable when and what-not. Would it be possible to make it so that an Entosis-linkable item (node, TCU, iHub etc.) delivers a message like "Invalid target. X item is invulnerable until Y-time"....or something along those lines. Even if it just tells you that it's an "invalid target" currently would be massively helpful. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 01:46:08 -
[264] - Quote
There is an odd thing happening since this patch few minutes ago. Before the patch someone was trying to cap our station in 2v- and made some progress. Now after the patch i came to undo their progress, but it tells me that station is invulnerable to entosis effects. It seems that it doesn't like the fact that we are now outside vulnerability window.
Is that the intended behavior? |
Jayne Fillon
731
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 02:03:16 -
[265] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:There is an odd thing happening since this patch few minutes ago. Before the patch someone was trying to cap our station in 2v- and made some progress. Now after the patch i came to undo their progress, but it tells me that station is invulnerable to entosis effects. It seems that it doesn't like the fact that we are now outside vulnerability window.
Is that the intended behavior? If there is progress made on a structure when vulnerability period ends, it should still be able to be captured, or reset.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 07:01:57 -
[266] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one. That i understood thanks
So... thoughts?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 07:21:46 -
[267] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Warmeister wrote:There is an odd thing happening since this patch few minutes ago. Before the patch someone was trying to cap our station in 2v- and made some progress. Now after the patch i came to undo their progress, but it tells me that station is invulnerable to entosis effects. It seems that it doesn't like the fact that we are now outside vulnerability window.
Is that the intended behavior? If there is progress made on a structure when vulnerability period ends, it should still be able to be captured, or reset.
we tried yesterday but when window closed we got all our entosis stopped and basically we wasted half an hour |
Blaed Drwd
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 07:43:54 -
[268] - Quote
Quote:SilentAsTheGrave Posted: 2015.06.24 07:01
Ruune en Gravonere wrote: SilentAsTheGrave wrote: For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one.
That i understood thanks
So... thoughts?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
I see where you're going with that, and it makes sense. I'd ,however, limit the modifying factor to adjacent systems that are in the same constellation. With that your capital system (your core) is nice and snug and secure with your borders being a little squishy. But if you manage to hold a whole constellation that should be....rewarded?...and the ADM should remain intact. Make sense? |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 11:44:53 -
[269] - Quote
I could be wrong here but i tried installing strategic upgrades. we have only had the ihub, sov etc in the system contested and never lost but not we havent held long enough to install the upgrades. i believe it was set so that we could or did i miss something?
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 14:18:43 -
[270] - Quote
broken code sorry see below |
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
30
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 14:19:36 -
[271] - Quote
CCP Fozzie and Team five 0- "This goal would be broken if certain types of forces could somehow just ignore enemies (for instance, through overwhelming remote repair or through evasion) or if mechanics pushed fights towards indefinite deathless stalemates. This goal is the reason for most of the special restrictions and limitations on the Entosis Link, such as the GÇ£no remote repsGÇ¥ rule."
How are we supposed to be testing this when quite literally it is an endless stalemate if, when both sides have equal numbers and when one side has superior numbers the can just field AT ships and infinite Capitals and Sub-Capitals and pretty much use the same Dominion bully tactics. Play testing the mechanic is nice but when you made it a competition and didn't take into consideration the actual dynamics of the competition you pretty much said "hey, IDGAF if you guys use blobs to hellcamp like the Dominion SOV system just have the numbers to do that and spread out and capture everything and you get to win"
Furthermore, The Evasion statement is 0% true when the Entosis Link II can basically be used out to 250km on a ship that can speed tank at range... Guess what beats that...NOTHING. You can't accurately scan down a ship going as fast as what some people have seen on the test server and even if you do by the time you land on grid they are already too far away to do anything. Add this to the absurd fleet warp changes and you basically have an invincible ship that can entosis freely or prevent counter entosising.
As expected a few things happened
1. Brave had their usual drama and pretty much gave up because they stopped caring which in turn screwed over their "blues" because from a tactical standpoint, aligning with your next door neighbor is smart, but from an execution based standpoint, Brave is cancer and anything it touches goes to ****.
2. PL flexed it's Supercarrier and Titan muscle due to the practically zero risk involved(other than it being gone on the test server). You don't have you enemy plus 2k-3k other people trying to whore on KMs. So, you can freely use things like this with no repercussions nor did they have to worry about a larger alliance countering them with their own Super and Titan Blob. Giving PL far too much freedom to maneuver things that they would not use so excessively in a scenario where the loss would be real.
3. The excessive use of unrealistic doctrines lead to mass disinterest due to the fact that the people who were testing got what they needed to know out of it with a base understanding of how to attack and defends SOV and after that didn't care because through unrealistic doctrines the testing value ceased to be anything outside of who has more people willing to participate.
4. Most alliances who didn't show up early on had a few people figuring out how the SOV system works and will likely be coming into the competition near the end when capping SOV actually means you can keep it cause the competition is at its end and it will be impossible to capture it back when zero day hits.
The FozzieSov mechanic is new and interesting and will likely add some interesting changes to the Nullsec dynamic but this "competition" is absolute cancer and at this point is the Spectre and PL show. Everyone else has basically lost interest; between the incomprehensive UI, the inability to know how much, by % or by time, you have completed of you "attack or defense", and the absolutely ridiculous doctrines that are being used; nobody really seems to care anymore. |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 14:53:34 -
[272] - Quote
My somewhat small alliance has not lost interest in this and are still going when we can.
As for blobs and at doctrines, we fielded a rather small t3 fleet the other night and we killed alot more AT ships than we lost T3's and no we didnt have any logi. it was only when supers arrived on field that we moved on. we have been doing this quite a bit since this started and not just in t3's, we have used t1 bs and smaller with similar results.
as for the actual test, i think its going well, still a few minor things but i for one am almost convinced to return to null sec and a few of my alliance mates are considering the same also. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
7
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:18:02 -
[273] - Quote
the main thing that killed this competition is lack of dedication from most of the alliances that registered.
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:46:30 -
[274] - Quote
Dare I say we got more activity on duality than we do on some of our ops and roams on tranquility ? :) |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
31
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:51:55 -
[275] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:the main thing that killed this competition is lack of dedication from most of the alliances that registered.
This, exactly this. The problem is that everyone is complaining about the exact things I mentioned previously and refuse to participate because of it, the frustration lies, not only in the lack of participation but, in the complaints that are becoming the scapegoats everyone eludes to. It is frustrating being one of the few people that is trying ATM within the alliance and about all I can do is have conversations about random philosophical stuff and make horrible typo mistakes in the chat channels that are highly embarrassing for me regardless of how much nobody gives a crap.
I can hardly actually participate in the testing environment since it is rather hard to do anything with a maximum of 5-10 people other than be annoying and that really doesn't add anything of value to the testing environment.
The reality is if you want max participation these are the things that need to change because the value of learning the new mechanic is lost when you don't have the proper participation. The UI is buggy and there are a lot of thing that were mentioned that would make this FozzieSov mechanic better. I know it is still in the testing stage and will continue to be buggy for a while. If you combine the buggy mechanic and UI with the aforementioned complaints it makes for an unwillingness to participate. Not only do people want to learn the new FozzieSov but they would like to experiment with realistic doctrines and fight a war on a footing that would be realistic in a competitive environment. If the devaluation of in game assets allows for market hubs that have been free-ported to become ship pinatas where is the value in testing anything within the context of competition. I have no actual issue with the current way things are and I will continue to try to urge people to participate in order to learn this new mechanic and get some experience with it but I can only relay the complaints that are discouraging people.
I, myself, do enjoy being able to use things I never would be able to use on TQ because it's fun and interesting. Unfortunately, not everyone sees it this way and a lot of people saw that PL was involved and knew for a fact they would abuse their sheer number of supers and titans. This caused them to shy away at first. Then after that the excessive use of unrealistic doctrines based on the sheer isk inefficiency that those doctrines would produce if they were defeated on TQ caused a lot of people to stop participating because this was supposed to be a competition and now it has become a game of who can reship the fastest into the hard counters to doctrines that are not efficient or likely at all due to the general misering of the actual AT ships.
The sentiment is if I wouldn't see in on TQ why should it be in play on Duality during a wargame exercise. When participating in a wargame IRL I never was given equipment that I wouldn't use during actual combat, or that was either experimental or not part of the unit's MTOE (Modifications of Table of Equipment) and if the equipment was down for maintenance or was called out of play due to a catastrophic kill it was out of play. You turn a playtest into a wargame run it like one, if you don't have the knowledge of what a wargame is than do not call it that. There is a strong military community within EVE and all you have to do is ask about these kinds of things. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13022
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 15:57:50 -
[276] - Quote
Hey everyone. We had a defect yesterday that caused the initial entosis reinforcement of structures to ignore the defense multiplier. We've fixed the issue early this morning and I've gone through and done the same thing we did at the beginning of the competition when a similar issue appeared. We've removed some of the reinforcement timers and left others, to roughly simulate what could have been reinforced with the same amount of effort if the capture times had been correct.
I'm also going to be doing a run through the competition zone tonight and adding some strategic indexes to systems that are still owned by their original alliances. This will allow you folks to test out strategic IHub upgrades (which should be working now).
IMPORTANT NOTE: You should be receiving corporation bills for your IHubs now. At the moment those bills don't do anything when they expire, but we're going to change that at some point soon and that would mean structures exploding when bills aren't paid. The SCC does not **** around. Pay your bills folks.
And here's a list of the remaining active reinforcement timers for the next 24hrs:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing VKI-T7 Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.7 Ongoing 9-F0B2 TCU Brave Collective 3.1 Ongoing 4B-NQN TCU Brave Collective 5.7 Ongoing Z-RFE3 IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.2 Ongoing E-YJ8G Station Eastasia Alliance 5.3 Ongoing FX-7EM Station Freeport Freeport 1 Ongoing 2-TEGJ Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.24 16:23 Shintaht Station Fidelas Constans 4.1 2015.06.24 16:42 D61A-G Station Fidelas Constans 2.5 2015.06.24 16:46 D61A-G IHub Fidelas Constans 2.5 2015.06.24 17:02 D61A-G TCU Fidelas Constans 2.5 2015.06.24 20:09 18XA-C TCU Pandemic Legion 2.2 2015.06.24 20:42 H9-J8N Station Pandemic Legion 5.2 2015.06.24 22:22 D-6WS1 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.24 22:53 3GXF-U Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.25 00:10 7MD-S1 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.25 00:53 G-AOTH Station Pandemic Legion 1.6 2015.06.25 02:16 49GC-R Station Freeport Freeport 1.6 2015.06.25 03:40 YWS0-Z IHub Brave Collective 4.6 2015.06.25 04:29 3KB-J0 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.3 2015.06.25 07:10 BK4-YC Station Freeport Freeport 5.2 2015.06.25 07:28 4B-NQN Station Freeport Freeport 4.8 2015.06.25 10:34 3D-CQU Station No Not Believing 2.7 2015.06.25 11:26 F-YH5B Station Freeport Freeport 5.2 2015.06.25 13:01 H-GKI6 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 2015.06.25 13:56 G-5EN2 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 2015.06.25 14:20 9-F0B2 Station Freeport Freeport 2.2
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
314
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:20:24 -
[277] - Quote
Blaed Drwd wrote:Quote:SilentAsTheGrave Posted: 2015.06.24 07:01
Ruune en Gravonere wrote: SilentAsTheGrave wrote: For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one.
That i understood thanks
So... thoughts?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
I see where you're going with that, and it makes sense. I'd ,however, limit the modifying factor to adjacent systems that are in the same constellation. With that your capital system (your core) is nice and snug and secure with your borders being a little squishy. But if you manage to hold a whole constellation that should be....rewarded?...and the ADM should remain intact. Make sense? I understand. I like the idea of there always being a soft spot to start on and at the same time, I like the idea of a reward for controlling the whole constellation. I'm torn.
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
DaReaper
Net 7
2240
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 16:50:23 -
[278] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Ruune en Gravonere wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:For each system adjacent that is not part of the same alliance sov, lowers the defensive multiplier cap by one. That i understood thanks So... thoughts?
Too close to the abomination that was Constellation Sov. Which was the worst thing ccp had ever done to sov
OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:00:30 -
[279] - Quote
@Fozzi... um... we seem to have had all our sov indexes kinda messed up... mistake?
EDIT***Also.. it means we have no idea what our vulnerability window is as we didnt see the numbers before they came out... |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13022
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:04:58 -
[280] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:@Fozzi... um... we seem to have had all our sov indexes kinda messed up... mistake?
EDIT***Also.. it means we have no idea what our vulnerability window is as we didnt see the numbers before they came out... Can you be more specific?
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Viaharo Musa
Bearded BattleBears Brave Collective
26
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:08:27 -
[281] - Quote
I would have loved to see a realistic test. But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning. Reasons why: Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.
As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)
All said i really like the new sov setup but just be aware, it will change nothing really in TQ due to the fact that capitals will still be blob'd to control the sub cap forces. Triage carriers will be a thing with probably triage supers. In all my time playing eve, and all i have seen in null, i don't see this new sov iteration changing anything really in null. Sure more small fights will happen, but big boys will still be using massive super blobs to rule the field. This will turn in to the same as usual. Bigger critical mass blobs farming the little guys.
I see null becoming even more stagnant. Lets hope im wrong. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13022
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:12:15 -
[282] - Quote
I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Parley Queen
Dimensional Drift
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:27:02 -
[283] - Quote
Viaharo Musa wrote:I would have loved to see a realistic test. But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning. Reasons why: Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.
As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)
Dude i am dualboxing on a freaking laptop and the performance is exactly the same as TQ no matter how cluttered a grid is. Please keep the excuses coming why this test is bad, the responses from brave and fcon so far have been pure gold. The simple fact that so many people are unable to adapt to two new things at once(market seed+new sov) and rather chose to quit is astonishing. What will the brave AT team say when they have to fight AT ships in the AT? 'Awh too bad, they had supers and the grid was cluttered and their AT ships are too OP for us, at least we salvaged one wreck'
also SFA is recruiting if you want to afk nodes and/or fight PL hopefully. |
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 17:40:52 -
[284] - Quote
[/quote] I assume you mean the strategic upgrades being reset? That happened when we switched around the back-end for it, and I'm gonna pass out some new strategic levels so people can test their ihub upgrades.[/quote]
Sorry... really didnt compute what you said with what was in system... :) |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
32
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 18:31:11 -
[285] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback).
The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server. When you only have 2 alliances left willing to participate that are "blue" with each other what makes you think that they will expose any bug that gives them a tactical advantage to exploit when this goes live. This is the fundamental flaw with calling this a Wargame there is no incentive to expose bugs that can be exploited if it gives you an advantage over your opponent. Not to mention the level of realism that a Wargaming implies.
I am not bashing on you at all CCP Fozzie I absolutely love the idea of FozzieSov and think it is a fresh new mechanic that will really improve player experience all together. In my opinion you could have gone about this differently and give a little better incentive to the participants as a whole not just the alliance naming rights of a module. Not everyone cares all that much about lore, and corporations come and go within alliances if the incentive was player focused like the free SP on sisi incentives I feel like there would have been a far better turnout than the current dismal number of people actually playtesting this.
I purpose better incentives such as a guaranteed spot in the alliance tournament next year for the top 4 alliances who have the most active participants. You want to get an effective play test when making it a wargame give us something more than a mod to name.
I am going to continue to try and get as many people to participate as possible just so the knowledge isn't focused to one individual or a select few individuals. The more people know what they are doing when taking SOV the better. This is so that the employment of tactics from the test server can be properly executed and disseminated to the lowest level FC's and leaders to prepare them for the upcoming changes rather than leave all of it reliant on a SOV team who has to coordinate so far ahead that they will not have the mobility to be successful in the new SOV system.
Just what insight I have. No hate, All love. |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
32
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 18:46:43 -
[286] - Quote
Parley Queen wrote:Viaharo Musa wrote:I would have loved to see a realistic test. But sadly. Its been a shitshow from the beginning. Reasons why: Unrealistic ships and fittings due to no cost on the server. This lead to unrealistic fleets and tactics.
As a side effect, way to much clutter for even the most robust gaming system to have some lag due to so many wrecks / abandon'd drones (again prob due to no cost on the server)
Dude i am dualboxing on a freaking laptop and the performance is exactly the same as TQ no matter how cluttered a grid is. Please keep the excuses coming why this test is bad, the responses from brave and fcon so far have been pure gold. The simple fact that so many people are unable to adapt to two new things at once(market seed+new sov) and rather chose to quit is astonishing. What will the brave AT team say when they have to fight AT ships in the AT? 'Awh too bad, they had supers and the grid was cluttered and their AT ships are too OP for us, at least we salvaged one wreck' also SFA is recruiting if you want to afk nodes and/or fight PL hopefully.
If the same thing were happening to you this would be the exact way you would respond. If FCON and Brave had the participation on the test server to outnumber what the participation of PL and SFA has been the exact complaints would be fielded by the opposite side and we would have the same response you are having.
If you cannot look at something like this from an unbiased perspective and imagine the situation reversed onto you, then you are failing to grasp the true complaint, which is people will not participate in a Wargame that has limited levels of realism or practical application. The value of this is simply who can get the most people to log onto a server where actions have zero effect on the live server and the incentive is not enough for enough people to care.
I'm not trying to call SFA/PL out or be salty, yes I am frustrated at the lack of participation but I am glad someone is participating I really wish our turnout was better for this. If it were we could have actually put up a fight. I just hope that something can be learned from this and it does at least the job of the playtesting and work out all the bugs and hiccups. When this goes live people will have no choice but to participate and I truly think it will be utterly chaotic, which, I am looking forward to |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1322
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:35:31 -
[287] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:
The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.
I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell.
~
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
32
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 19:49:08 -
[288] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote:Ryno Caval wrote:
The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.
I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell.
Unfortunately not everyone is this "honorable" and will let some of the bugs slip through. I wish this were not the case but it's not just in EVE, this is a mentality that is ported from real life. Perhaps my faith in humanity if just non existent due to personal experiences but who knows. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13025
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 20:18:34 -
[289] - Quote
Latest timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing 4B-NQN TCU Brave Collective 5.7 Ongoing 18XA-C TCU Pandemic Legion 2.2 2015.06.24 20:42 H9-J8N Station Pandemic Legion 5.2 2015.06.24 22:22 D-6WS1 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.24 22:53 3GXF-U Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.25 00:10 7MD-S1 Station Freeport Freeport 1 2015.06.25 00:53 G-AOTH Station Pandemic Legion 1.6 2015.06.25 02:16 49GC-R Station Freeport Freeport 1.6 2015.06.25 03:40 YWS0-Z IHub Brave Collective 4.6 2015.06.25 04:29 3KB-J0 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.3 2015.06.25 07:10 BK4-YC Station Freeport Freeport 5.2 2015.06.25 07:28 4B-NQN Station Freeport Freeport 4.8 2015.06.25 10:34 3D-CQU Station No Not Believing 2.7 2015.06.25 11:26 F-YH5B Station Freeport Freeport 5.2 2015.06.25 13:01 H-GKI6 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 2015.06.25 13:56 G-5EN2 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 2015.06.25 14:20 9-F0B2 Station Freeport Freeport 2.2 2015.06.25 16:47 Shintaht IHub Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 16:53 H6-CX8 Station Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:01 Y-MPWL Station Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:08 Y-MPWL TCU Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:09 VKI-T7 Station Freeport Freeport 3.7 2015.06.25 17:14 H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:18 H6-CX8 TCU Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:35 Shintaht TCU Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 17:37 Y-MPWL IHub Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:39 SI-I89 Station Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 17:49 SI-I89 TCU Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:00 SI-I89 IHub Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:06 Shintaht Station Freeport Freeport 3.5 2015.06.25 18:15 E-YJ8G Station Freeport Freeport 4.4 2015.06.25 18:32 D61A-G Station Freeport Freeport 2 2015.06.25 19:37 VKI-T7 TCU Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.25 19:43 UL-7I8 Station Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 19:50 F-YH5B TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.25 20:00 7MD-S1 TCU Praetorian Directorate 4.3 2015.06.25 20:02 UL-7I8 TCU Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 20:03 ERVK-P IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.3
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 21:43:18 -
[290] - Quote
@fozzie did you get a chance to reset the sov levels? we want to set up our JB network |
|
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1323
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:04:51 -
[291] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:Elise Randolph wrote:Ryno Caval wrote:
The simple fact of the matter is you created something that defeats that purpose exactly, you should have not incorporated a competition into it, people are so diverted away from the actual purpose of playtesting that some bugs that are major enough to highly affect the effectiveness of the new system of SOV will be hidden away so that when this does go live people can exploit them as much as they did on the test server.
I'm just going to say this flat out, but if you don't report bugs that have to do with the sov system on Duality you're dumb as hell. Unfortunately not everyone is this "honorable" and will let some of the bugs slip through. Also there is no way of knowing if a bug is being reported or discovered by enough people for it to be reported for certain. I wish this were not the case but it's not just in EVE, this is a mentality that is ported from real life. Perhaps my faith in humanity if just non existent due to personal experiences but who knows.
Are you just always high or something
~
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13025
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:32:08 -
[292] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:@fozzie did you get a chance to reset the sov levels? we want to set up our JB network
You should be good to go now.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
380
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:47:18 -
[293] - Quote
Is this the appropriate thread to let CCP know what we would like our prize module to be named?
Pandemic Legion officially requests:
JEFFRAIDER's Modified Compact Entosis "SovSucker5000" Link
Thank you.
JEFFRAIDER Official Pandemic Legion High King |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 22:48:25 -
[294] - Quote
IHub's still seem to be bugged for installing upgrades.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13025
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:29:23 -
[295] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:IHub's still seem to be bugged for installing upgrades. Please send in a bug report with details. Thanks.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1323
|
Posted - 2015.06.24 23:36:01 -
[296] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: IMPORTANT NOTE: You should be receiving corporation bills for your IHubs now. At the moment those bills don't do anything when they expire, but we're going to change that at some point soon and that would mean structures exploding when bills aren't paid. The SCC does not **** around. Pay your bills folks.
Just a friendly reminder to dudes: if you had autopay turned on for all sovereignty bills that is NOT ENOUGH. The bills actually show up under a new category: http://i.imgur.com/gimLb8u.png
~
|
Langbaobao
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
56
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 01:00:27 -
[297] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:I'm not trying to call SFA/PL out or be salty
You sound pretty salty TBH. You should relax a bit and enjoy the ride. |
Cannonfodder Ellecon
Cabbage Corp
4
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 04:41:34 -
[298] - Quote
Fozzie
Can we please get Constellation "04-H4M" Strategic Index reset back to lvl 5 so we can do IHUB testing
Thankyou
EVE Down Under - a Fanfest for the AUTZ
27-29 November 2015 in Sydney, Australia
www.evedownunder.com
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 09:20:21 -
[299] - Quote
One of the latest patches broke the freeport stations capture. The nodes now seem to take into account defense multipliers from the system, and take ages to capture instead of usual 12 minutes |
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
622
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 10:18:07 -
[300] - Quote
Cannonfodder Ellecon wrote:Fozzie
Can we please get Constellation "04-H4M" Strategic Index reset back to lvl 5 so we can do IHUB testing
Thankyou Any system still owned by their original Alliance have had their levels reset to the level they were at at the start of the tournament (Note this was not level 5 for all systems). If your seeing issues with this could you tell us which systems exactly are incorrect?
Warmeister wrote:One of the latest patches broke the freeport stations capture. The nodes now seem to take into account defense multipliers from the system, and take ages to capture instead of usual 12 minutes Yep, I've confirmed this issue this morning and we'll get a fix in asap, likely this evening. Any events still affected after the update will be fixed.
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 13:44:58 -
[301] - Quote
Also , is it normal for a system to remain in vulnerable state after the window passes ?
Our window should have closed around 19:30 , 19:40 , but PL were able to continue capturing for at least an hour - even after breaking locks momentarily. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 14:17:16 -
[302] - Quote
To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
622
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 14:18:08 -
[303] - Quote
The issue with Strategic index persistence should be resolved now, let us know if your systems index looks incorrect!
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
CoffinBait
Colonial Cartel Praetorian Directorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 15:18:36 -
[304] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:To make your structures secure after the vulnerability period ends you need to regain full control of them. If a structure is in a partially contested state it will remain vulnerable until one side or the other takes full control. thanks for the clarification |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
320
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:28:26 -
[305] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:31:02 -
[306] - Quote
Latest reinforcement timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing YWS0-Z IHub Brave Collective 4.6 Ongoing 4B-NQN Station Freeport Freeport 4.8 Ongoing H-GKI6 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 Ongoing G-5EN2 Station Freeport Freeport 3.4 Ongoing 9-F0B2 Station Freeport Freeport 2.2 2015.06.25 16:47 Shintaht IHub Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 16:53 H6-CX8 Station Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:01 Y-MPWL Station Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:08 Y-MPWL TCU Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:09 VKI-T7 Station Freeport Freeport 3.7 2015.06.25 17:14 H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:18 H6-CX8 TCU Fidelas Constans 5.6 2015.06.25 17:35 Shintaht TCU Fidelas Constans 3.5 2015.06.25 17:37 Y-MPWL IHub Fidelas Constans 3.2 2015.06.25 17:39 SI-I89 Station Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 17:49 SI-I89 TCU Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:00 SI-I89 IHub Fidelas Constans 4.8 2015.06.25 18:06 Shintaht Station Freeport Freeport 3.5 2015.06.25 18:15 E-YJ8G Station Freeport Freeport 4.4 2015.06.25 18:32 D61A-G Station Freeport Freeport 2 2015.06.25 19:37 VKI-T7 TCU Pandemic Legion 3.7 2015.06.25 19:43 UL-7I8 Station Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 19:50 F-YH5B TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.25 20:00 7MD-S1 TCU Praetorian Directorate 4.3 2015.06.25 20:02 UL-7I8 TCU Praetorian Directorate 3.7 2015.06.25 20:03 ERVK-P IHub Praetorian Directorate 4.3 2015.06.25 20:17 BR-N97 TCU Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:22 S25C-K Station Praetorian Directorate 3.8 2015.06.25 20:29 IS-R7P TCU Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:31 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 1 2015.06.25 20:33 IS-R7P IHub Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 20:34 S25C-K TCU Praetorian Directorate 3.8 2015.06.25 20:34 IS-R7P Station Praetorian Directorate 6 2015.06.25 20:41 ERVK-P Station Praetorian Directorate 3.4 2015.06.25 21:06 BR-N97 IHub Praetorian Directorate 5.6 2015.06.25 21:27 8P9-BM Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.9 2015.06.25 21:44 F-YH5B IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 6 2015.06.25 21:59 H-GKI6 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 3.4 2015.06.25 22:18 18XA-C Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 2.2 2015.06.25 23:24 D-6WS1 IHub Brave Collective 2.2 2015.06.25 23:29 D61A-G IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.06.25 23:51 Z-RFE3 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.3 2015.06.26 00:27 0B-HLZ IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 2015.06.26 00:40 0B-HLZ TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 2015.06.26 01:23 I-MGAB IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:29 I-MGAB Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:36 I-MGAB TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 2015.06.26 01:43 KA6D-K Station No Not Believing 1.6 2015.06.26 01:47 G-5EN2 TCU Brave Collective 3.4 2015.06.26 02:14 3KB-J0 TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 2015.06.26 02:16 9UY4-H TCU Brave Collective 5.2 2015.06.26 02:19 3KB-J0 IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 2015.06.26 02:50...
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:32:15 -
[307] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
320
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:57:12 -
[308] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered. What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak?
Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13026
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 16:59:54 -
[309] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:I want to make sure we're clear that this was never intended to be a test of fleet compositions and tactics. Unfortunately there was no way to make those aspects realistic on a test server.
This test is intended to help find bugs, to help us improve the UI and how the system is communicated in the client, and to allow players and alliances to try out the mechanical nuts and bolts and understand them better (which helps us get better feedback). Out of curiosity, is it possible to see the logged in player count for Duality during this playtest competition? Chribba has you covered. What is your thought of player participation the last week go from about 350 peak steadily decline down to just a little over a hundred at the peak? Numbers have been high enough for us to get a lot of good bug reports and feedback. From our perspective they've been fine.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1703
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 21:59:22 -
[310] - Quote
Dreamer Targaryen wrote:The system "YWS0-Z" is somehow bugged: - When you are in the system, you are unable to see the HUD (systeminfo, route, opportunities) - The status was: freeported station, brave ihub, no tcu. - After putting up a tcu and activating my entosis-module on it, I went through the warmup-cycle, then the 10min capture-time (white arrow-circle) and after that nothing happened. The tcu seems to be still owned by Concorde and my module is still cycling without doing anything. (De-activating and re-trying to entosify it had no effect either.) - The sovereign-tab of the system is blank. Hopefully most of these bugged systems have now been sorted, and structures should explode and be replaceable in a working manner. Of course if you have any other cases of the UI breaking or s structure doing something odd, please send a bug report from your client (and maybe report it here as well to see if anyone else if having similar issues).
Greygal wrote:On the solar system show info window, sovereignty tab, I like how it now states clearly "Station secure" or "Station vulnerable now".
However, there is no way to see what the vulnerability time window is for the system now. Also, the displaying of the current time followed by a timer that is always starting at two hours continues to cause confusion. I think all the places where that fake 2-hour countdown was happening have now been replaced with real data. (At least they have in the build going out tomorrow, if not already in the one you have)
Greygal wrote:That's odd... show-info on alliances always shows 10:00 to me, which is our default vulnerability window. Is your default vulnerability window 02:00 by chance? You don't realize how much you use and depend on Dotlan until you can't use it, WTB Dotlan for Duality! Yup we've got a defect on the default vulnerability window always showing your own setting when you look at another alliance. Hopefully fixed soon.
We've got a nice update to the alliance's dashboard coming tomorrow that hooks it up to real data from the server, so you should be able to see at a glance all your own structures
"This one time, on patch day..."
@ccp_masterplan | Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
|
|
|
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 22:18:22 -
[311] - Quote
Heres a little something that has been bugging the crap out of me although its not a bug. The display in the top left has blue status going left ti right, but when you open system info and view it has blue status going right to left. Can you make them both left to right please? :D |
Ken Cook
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.25 22:23:22 -
[312] - Quote
So just to be clear about this... Do you can set the individual systems to different vulnerability times? or can you set each of the individual structures i.e. station/tcu/ihun? or is the vulnerability window for all the sov set though the alliance sov window centrally?
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:44:55 -
[313] - Quote
@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
michael chasseur
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 00:55:31 -
[314] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
yeah this has been awesome practice for dual-boxing archons so far, but if it's meant to empower low SP people to take sov, they're in for a rude awakening in slowcat+triage form |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
101
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 01:03:46 -
[315] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship? Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.
Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here? |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
459
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 01:15:44 -
[316] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended.
Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?
120 seconds times 5 is 600 seconds, not 1200 seconds :)
Grath is correct, taking only 8 minutes longer to capture a node with a capital ship does not seem to be as intended.
If it takes 12 minutes to capture a non-bonused command node with a subcap (2 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 2 minutes each for a 10 minute capture), then on a capital it should take 10 minute warmup and 5 cycles at 10 minutes each for a total of 60 minutes for a capital to capture a non-bonused command node.
If it's only taking 8 minutes longer total in a capital ship, that does not seem to be as intended, and definitely will encourage greater use of capitals as entosis links, because if it is taking 45-60 minutes anyways and a capital only adds 8 minutes, why wouldn't you use capitals?
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Eve Talaminada
Chao3 Chao3 Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 02:30:06 -
[317] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship?
Fully supported!
Using caps for entosis cannot be just a mere minutes longer than subcaps. A significant differences of capture time between sub caps and caps, forcing the caps on the field much longer, is the only thing that will make pilots hesitate to bring a cap as an entosis ship.. They can still easily bring them as powerful grid control ships.
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:33:24 -
[318] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:@CCP Fozzie
I was under the impression that anything involving entosis links and capitals was x5.
This to me meant that if you had a 10 minute warm up cycle in a sub cap you'd have a 50 minute warm up time in a capital.
This was a really good way to avoid capital blobs owning the new system.
It turns out thats not the case, and I'm telling you right now that capitals will ruin your system by becoming unstopable entosis machines because it turns out its only EIGHT FRICKIN MINUTES LONGER IN A CAPITAL THAN IT IS IN A SUB CAP.
Seriously, how mad am I right now? I've been a huge fan of this new system thinking you finally had something and understood something and you do this with cap ships?
How can you not see how terrible it is that its only EIGHT frickin minutes longer to use a cap ship? Um... the cycle time is 5x the normal one. A t2 entosis has a cycle time of 120 s and when you fit it to a capital ship that becomes 1200 s. You can easily change the base time or multiplier if you like, but this is pretty much working as intended. Are you saying you want a higher multiplier or a longer base cycle here?
ALL of it should be five times longer.
So if the cycle is normally 2 minutes, it should be five times longer, however if you need to entos a thing for `10 minutes in a sub cap, it should take FIVE TIMES LONGER in a cap, or fifty minutes.
If you do anything else than make it insanely time inefficient to use caps, caps is exactly what will be used because an attacker/defenders initial strain point has been shown to be the entosis ship itself. There isn't a singular subcap that you can make immune to alpha, however carriers -which already see heavy use that CCP d- turn out to be really good at entosis work under fire, regardless of its ability to get help.
I can't stress this enough, if you don't do something about capitals doing entosis work, in the vein of how long it takes them, as in make it super super long in every regard, you're asking for what comes from this.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:41:31 -
[319] - Quote
i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules
t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min
that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2756
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:50:22 -
[320] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:i think you guys are mixing up t1 and t2 modules
t1 entosis - normal cycle time - 5 min, capital cycle time - 25 min t2 entosis - normal cycle time - 2 min, capital cycle time - 10 min
that's how multipliers work, if you start with lower base you get x times lower result the alternative would be to either increase the multiplier so it would only make sense to use t2 module on capitals, or to just give them a flat penalty, which is not something CCP likes to do iirc
Nobody will bother with t1 entosis links on a carrier so disregard that, you're already putting a couple billion out there, you'll use t2, so its 10 minutes.
Now, unless they find a way to extend the length of time you need to entos the thing by 5 as well then its never going to work.
Testing has shown that its EIGHT MINUTES longer to use a capital.
That is an unacceptably low barrier to entry for the capital ships that will have terrible results for this sov system and what CCP wants to achieve.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 03:58:29 -
[321] - Quote
yeah i just realised that you guys are complaining about the fact that capture times are not affected by cycle times, apart from initial warm up cycle |
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 06:46:51 -
[322] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:ALL of it should be five times longer. So you're saying not just the cycle time but also the actual capture time then? Gotcha.
Also, ignore my terrible 3AM math above, cycle time is ofc 600 s and nothing else. |
DNLeviathan
Dead Or Alive Inc. Praetorian Directorate
46
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 07:07:34 -
[323] - Quote
why not just make the entosis links non fittable to caps? even with the extended capture time i can guarentee that people will use caps to entosis if they are desperate to capture a system. |
Dreamer Targaryen
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:57:52 -
[324] - Quote
Huh, I was under the impression that a capital-ship was ment to capture 5x slower than a "normal" ship. If it really only effects the cycle-time, then this should be indeed corrected.
On a related note: From my understanding, the 5x penalty-multiplier is a compensation for capital ships being ecm-immune (dreads: siege; carrier: triage; supers: in general), so the only counter would be to kill them. Why don't have marauders, who have the same capability (bastion) a similar penalty? |
Salem Kane
Project Pendragon
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 08:58:08 -
[325] - Quote
You should keep in mind that this is a drawback, as also a minor plus for the Capital. The Capital is pinned down for a 10min cycle, but in return, it can run 10min cycles for 1 stront, where smal ships would need 5 stront with thier 2min cycles, which makes a capital more fitting for nodes with high defence multipliers.
What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives.
I personally would find it more fitting, to reset the cycle with the capture of a node, or if the cycle is below 50% on capture.
Just my Five cent. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 09:17:27 -
[326] - Quote
Salem Kane wrote: What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives. .
that's a good thing though, cause it increases the risk for capitals, discouraging their use (hopefully) |
Salem Kane
Project Pendragon
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 09:20:43 -
[327] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Salem Kane wrote: What i personally find more anoying, that the cycle runs on when a node is captured. If you run a capital, and you capture the node at 5% on the next cycle, you have to stay around for another 95% = 9 1/2 minutes+1min aggro timer for jumpdrives. .
that's a good thing though, cause it increases the risk for capitals, discouraging their use (hopefully)
Yes, but if people really want caps to also have a 5x progress multiplier, you won't see them cap at all. Just tryhard carrier blobs defending the one ship capturing. But you're right, this is a good risk/use balance, keeping a cap pinned for 10mins all the time, but CCP shouldn't touch the capture progress on capitals.
PS.: Totally capturing nodes in a carrier atm.. and F5 dosn't update this site.. but deactivated my entosis link.. rekt. |
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:38:01 -
[328] - Quote
The entosis module also has a 'cool down' cycle much like going red on a cyno, triage or siege module. So while the node may be won in ~8 minutes faster than a subcap could have done it using a T2 entosis link, the capital ship is stuck there for up to another 10min after that waiting for the module to cycle off completely. In practice, due to server ticks, this means it takes a capital ship ~30 minutes to do what a T2 entosis link subcap can do in 12, because the "cooldown" doesn't start until the node captures, and the node captures at EXACTLY 10 minutes, assuming it was only a 10min node. Of course, this would be even longer if you're attacking something.
To be honest I feel like the 10 minute cycle time on a T2 entosis link is fine, it's 5 minutes longer than a normal triage cycle and puts an unsupported capital ship, which can't receive any friendly support at all, in ongoing mortal danger. Despite how OP this might look on Duality, anyone who uses unsupported triage carriers as entosis ships on TQ is going to get their **** stomped on.
Also please keep in mind we're not talking about one node here, or two, but 5 or more at at time, per sov object that has come out of reinforced. We've seen systems with 50+ nodes in them at once, and that's just on Duality. That's a lot of triage carriers even for PL to field at once, let alone Podunk Alliance. And you have to find some way to defend all of them, spread out around a constellation at the same time. If you attack one and they respond by jumping stuff in? Move on to the next one, there's plenty of multi-billion isk triage carriers to kill (in our fictional scenario where someone tries to capture all the nodes with triage carriers). |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13029
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:48:14 -
[329] - Quote
Like BlitZ mentions, the primary purpose of the longer cycle time is to force the capital ship into longer periods of vulnerability (where it cannot be repped, warp or jump) to compensate for their EHP. The cooldown after capturing is also a big deal when we're talking about fights over multiple nodes.
We do expect the 5x cycle time multiplier to be a significant penalty for the system on TQ, just as it is for station services on TQ now. However if capitals turn out to be a problem, it's trivial for us to adjust that cycle time penalty in a minor point release.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13029
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 10:48:41 -
[330] - Quote
New timers list:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier Ongoing Shintaht IHub Fidelas Constans 3.5 Ongoing Y-MPWL Station Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing Y-MPWL TCU Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing H6-CX8 IHub Fidelas Constans 5.6 Ongoing Shintaht TCU Fidelas Constans 3.5 Ongoing Y-MPWL IHub Fidelas Constans 3.2 Ongoing Shintaht Station Freeport Freeport 3.5 Ongoing D61A-G Station Freeport Freeport 2 Ongoing F-YH5B TCU Suddenly Spaceships. 6 Ongoing S25C-K Station Praetorian Directorate 3.8 Ongoing 18XA-C IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 1 Ongoing 8P9-BM Station Suddenly Spaceships. 3.9 Ongoing F-YH5B IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 6 Ongoing H-GKI6 IHub Suddenly Spaceships. 3.4 Ongoing 18XA-C Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 2.2 Ongoing D-6WS1 IHub Brave Collective 2.2 Ongoing D61A-G IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 Ongoing Z-RFE3 Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.3 Ongoing 0B-HLZ IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 Ongoing 0B-HLZ TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 3.7 Ongoing I-MGAB IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing I-MGAB Station I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing I-MGAB TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 5.2 Ongoing G-5EN2 TCU Brave Collective 3.4 Ongoing 3KB-J0 TCU I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 Ongoing 3KB-J0 IHub I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth 4.3 Ongoing G-5EN2 IHub Brave Collective 3.4 Ongoing 3KB-J0 Station Freeport Freeport 4.3 2015.06.26 12:29 3D-CQU Station Freeport Freeport 2.7 2015.06.26 21:03 D61A-G TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.06.26 23:11 IS-R7P Station Freeport Freeport 6 2015.06.27 00:44 YWS0-Z TCU Brave Collective 3.7 2015.06.27 03:12 SI-I89 Station Freeport Freeport 4.4 2015.06.27 07:58 UL-7I8 Station Freeport Freeport 2.8 2015.06.27 09:14 ERVK-P Station Freeport Freeport 3.4
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 11:03:48 -
[331] - Quote
so many ongoing timers someone's been slacking off
Fozzie, any ETA on the fix for defence multipliers applying to defender and freeported stations? it's kinda hard to do 20 nodes with a 6x defense multiplier |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13031
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 11:22:54 -
[332] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:so many ongoing timers someone's been slacking off
Fozzie, any ETA on the fix for defence multipliers applying to defender and freeported stations? it's kinda hard to do 20 nodes with a 6x defense multiplier It's fixed internally we're just running a smoketest on the new build before deploying it to Duality.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Lebowski
C C P C C P Alliance
623
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 11:39:47 -
[333] - Quote
Sorry for the wait on the fix folks, a few large behind the scene changes have been implemented in the last day and we want to make sure the build is nice and stable for a weekend of war :)
CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
@CCP_Lebowski
|
|
Dreamer Targaryen
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 11:48:20 -
[334] - Quote
BlitZ Kotare wrote: In practice, due to server ticks, this means it takes a capital ship ~30 minutes to do what a T2 entosis link subcap can do in 12, because the "cooldown" doesn't start until the node captures, and the node captures at EXACTLY 10 minutes, assuming it was only a 10min node. Of course, this would be even longer if you're attacking something. After capturing 50+ 10min-nodes, I never had the case, where the module did not run out at a similar time (= a few (5?) seconds after) as the node was captured. So if you are not interrupted or the multiplier was not 1, I don't see, how it should ever take 30 minutes. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 12:02:21 -
[335] - Quote
it will depend on the indexes, but given that the base capture time of objects is close to 10 mins it will more often end cycle close to capping the node, rather than not |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13032
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 12:17:48 -
[336] - Quote
An unmodified and uncontested node should never stretch into an extra cycle for the 10 minute and 5 minute links, as the "10 minute" base capture time on the nodes is actually 9 minutes and 55 seconds now to provide a buffer for server ticks.
However once activity multipliers or other players start showing up, things change significantly.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
134
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 12:29:30 -
[337] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:An unmodified and uncontested node should never stretch into an extra cycle for the 10 minute and 5 minute links, as the "10 minute" base capture time on the nodes is actually 9 minutes and 55 seconds now to provide a buffer for server ticks.
However once activity multipliers or other players start showing up, things change significantly.
Oh. That must be new? I was using a Rorq and an Archon to capture some nodes on Duality to test out links on capitals earlier in the test. Almost every time (again, depending on ticks) I was stuck there for an extra 10min cycle even for 10min defensive nodes. So the 9min55s change might be in response to my earlier post in the thread questioning the length of cycle times post-node-save and such? Either way I approve, a very fair change IMO.
This means that, for defensive node saves, you're looking at 20min of "stuck" time for a capitals (assuming zero attacker activity), for offensive use you're looking at a bare minimum of 20min, upwards to... I guess 70? At a 6x multiplier it would take you 10min to warm up and 60min on target to capture that node, assuming a T2 entosis link of course. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13034
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 13:54:45 -
[338] - Quote
BlitZ Kotare wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:An unmodified and uncontested node should never stretch into an extra cycle for the 10 minute and 5 minute links, as the "10 minute" base capture time on the nodes is actually 9 minutes and 55 seconds now to provide a buffer for server ticks.
However once activity multipliers or other players start showing up, things change significantly. Oh. That must be new? I was using a Rorq and an Archon to capture some nodes on Duality to test out links on capitals earlier in the test. Almost every time (again, depending on ticks) I was stuck there for an extra 10min cycle even for 10min defensive nodes. So the 9min55s change might be in response to my earlier post in the thread questioning the length of cycle times post-node-save and such? Either way I approve, a very fair change IMO. This means that, for defensive node saves, you're looking at 20min of "stuck" time for a capitals (assuming zero attacker activity), for offensive use you're looking at a bare minimum of 20min, upwards to... I guess 70? At a 6x multiplier it would take you 10min to warm up and 60min on target to capture that node, assuming a T2 entosis link of course. Yeah we implemented this tweak last week thanks to the feedback so far. Thanks!
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 17:41:43 -
[339] - Quote
BlitZ Kotare wrote:The entosis module also has a 'cool down' cycle much like going red on a cyno, triage or siege module. So while the node may be won in ~8 minutes faster than a subcap could have done it using a T2 entosis link, the capital ship is stuck there for up to another 10min after that waiting for the module to cycle off completely. In practice, due to server ticks, this means it takes a capital ship ~30 minutes to do what a T2 entosis link subcap can do in 12, because the "cooldown" doesn't start until the node captures, and the node captures at EXACTLY 10 minutes, assuming it was only a 10min node. Of course, this would be even longer if you're attacking something.
To be honest I feel like the 10 minute cycle time on a T2 entosis link is fine, it's 5 minutes longer than a normal triage cycle and puts an unsupported capital ship, which can't receive any friendly support at all, in ongoing mortal danger. Despite how OP this might look on Duality, anyone who uses unsupported triage carriers as entosis ships on TQ is going to get their **** stomped on.
Also please keep in mind we're not talking about one node here, or two, but 5 or more at at time, per sov object that has come out of reinforced. We've seen systems with 50+ nodes in them at once, and that's just on Duality. That's a lot of triage carriers even for PL to field at once, let alone Podunk Alliance. And you have to find some way to defend all of them, spread out around a constellation at the same time. If you attack one and they respond by jumping stuff in? Move on to the next one, there's plenty of multi-billion isk triage carriers to kill (in our fictional scenario where someone tries to capture all the nodes with triage carriers). I think as well, the fact we're all basically having a knife fight in a phone box, makes things appear 'worse' than it would be in reality on TQ - no one has had to really worry about jump ranges/fatigue so far in this test.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2758
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 18:32:13 -
[340] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:BlitZ Kotare wrote:The entosis module also has a 'cool down' cycle much like going red on a cyno, triage or siege module. So while the node may be won in ~8 minutes faster than a subcap could have done it using a T2 entosis link, the capital ship is stuck there for up to another 10min after that waiting for the module to cycle off completely. In practice, due to server ticks, this means it takes a capital ship ~30 minutes to do what a T2 entosis link subcap can do in 12, because the "cooldown" doesn't start until the node captures, and the node captures at EXACTLY 10 minutes, assuming it was only a 10min node. Of course, this would be even longer if you're attacking something.
To be honest I feel like the 10 minute cycle time on a T2 entosis link is fine, it's 5 minutes longer than a normal triage cycle and puts an unsupported capital ship, which can't receive any friendly support at all, in ongoing mortal danger. Despite how OP this might look on Duality, anyone who uses unsupported triage carriers as entosis ships on TQ is going to get their **** stomped on.
Also please keep in mind we're not talking about one node here, or two, but 5 or more at at time, per sov object that has come out of reinforced. We've seen systems with 50+ nodes in them at once, and that's just on Duality. That's a lot of triage carriers even for PL to field at once, let alone Podunk Alliance. And you have to find some way to defend all of them, spread out around a constellation at the same time. If you attack one and they respond by jumping stuff in? Move on to the next one, there's plenty of multi-billion isk triage carriers to kill (in our fictional scenario where someone tries to capture all the nodes with triage carriers). I think as well, the fact we're all basically having a knife fight in a phone box, makes things appear 'worse' than it would be in reality on TQ - no one has had to really worry about jump ranges/fatigue so far in this test. People like blitz aren't going to try and screw over PL but if you pay close attention you'll notice he's using an archon and a rorq for a necrosis platform. That should scream warning to ccp and yet for some reason fozzie is just like eh whatever. Considering how long we've been stuck with the broken ishtar that they just won't fix after a year or more I have little faith in the We'll Adjust It Later response. I'm not sure if they have noticed but the games population is on actual danger art thus point and if they screw this up it'll likely not recover.
How hard is it to just err on the side of caution for once when it comes to a ship class that's always given them problems. But whatever, they're blowing it off and the proof that they were warned how bad it would be is right here in print
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
|
CAPS TIME
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 18:56:52 -
[341] - Quote
You are over reacting, how does he testing links on capitals(his words) more than a week ago "scream warning to ccp" and lead you to think it's OP? |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2758
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 19:38:57 -
[342] - Quote
CAPS TIME wrote:You are over reacting, how does he testing links on capitals(his words) more than a week ago "scream warning to ccp" and lead you to think it's OP? He's not warning them I am. I'm also one of the best capital fcs in the game. The fracture point currently in an entosis engagement is the entosis ship itself. Sub capital fights have shown that overwhelmingly you can counter your opponent by simply alpha striking him of the field. So the natural inclination is going to be too use the beefiest ship you can to get the job done. And you won't deploy a single carrier, they'll be in groups. Jump fatigue won't matter since carriers can take gates, and it'll all be nice and close in a singular constellation.
My alliance can put 100 carriers down without much effort in groups of twenty and still have a gigantic ball of supers ready to drop-áshould an entity try to counter the pod of carriers.
What's a smaller entity, or even a weak coalition going to do against that? And what is our disincentive? A few extra minutes for a near sure win?
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 20:15:29 -
[343] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:CAPS TIME wrote:You are over reacting, how does he testing links on capitals(his words) more than a week ago "scream warning to ccp" and lead you to think it's OP? He's not warning them I am. I'm also one of the best capital fcs in the game. The fracture point currently in an entosis engagement is the entosis ship itself. Sub capital fights have shown that overwhelmingly you can counter your opponent by simply alpha striking him of the field. So the natural inclination is going to be too use the beefiest ship you can to get the job done. And you won't deploy a single carrier, they'll be in groups. Jump fatigue won't matter since carriers can take gates, and it'll all be nice and close in a singular constellation. My alliance can put 100 carriers down without much effort in groups of twenty and still have a gigantic ball of supers ready to drop-áshould an entity try to counter the pod of carriers. What's a smaller entity, or even a weak coalition going to do against that? And what is our disincentive? A few extra minutes for a near sure win?
To be fair nerfing the entosis link for caps won't curtail that tactic... all you need to do is put and entosis link ship in the middle of your carrier pod and the result will likely be the same...
|
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2758
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 22:20:03 -
[344] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:CAPS TIME wrote:You are over reacting, how does he testing links on capitals(his words) more than a week ago "scream warning to ccp" and lead you to think it's OP? He's not warning them I am. I'm also one of the best capital fcs in the game. The fracture point currently in an entosis engagement is the entosis ship itself. Sub capital fights have shown that overwhelmingly you can counter your opponent by simply alpha striking him of the field. So the natural inclination is going to be too use the beefiest ship you can to get the job done. And you won't deploy a single carrier, they'll be in groups. Jump fatigue won't matter since carriers can take gates, and it'll all be nice and close in a singular constellation. My alliance can put 100 carriers down without much effort in groups of twenty and still have a gigantic ball of supers ready to drop-áshould an entity try to counter the pod of carriers. What's a smaller entity, or even a weak coalition going to do against that? And what is our disincentive? A few extra minutes for a near sure win? To be fair nerfing the entosis link for caps won't curtail that tactic... all you need to do is put and entosis link ship in the middle of your carrier pod and the result will likely be the same... Not really, you can still roll in with munnins, tornado's, machs, hell even a few grip of arty ruptures and just womp the entosis ship from range and then warp out.
It will take a capital force to stop an entosising capital force, and the entosising capital force will be the weapon of choice because its the ONLY thing that can withstand concentrated sub cap alpha.
An insured triage carrier is a minimalist loss comparatively to other things that will stand up to ewar.
This whole 'entosis ships wont start working until the grid is secure' is pure fantasy, we've proven that with the right ships you can easily do it with hostiles on grid.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Lucas Quaan
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
102
|
Posted - 2015.06.26 23:35:11 -
[345] - Quote
And while we're at it, taking sov is still ultimately tied to a single location event when you defend/contest a freshly dropped IHub/TCU. I'm not saying that waiting for that contest is a good strategy for a defender, you do after all lose your current structure and all its benefits, but it is most definitely viable for an opportunist third party attacker that just so happens to be in the area. Why go through all the grinding if you can simply drop the hammer for 20 min at the end?
You do have to work for the station, though. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
10
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 05:29:42 -
[346] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:And while we're at it, taking sov is still ultimately tied to a single location event when you defend/contest a freshly dropped IHub/TCU. I'm not saying that waiting for that contest is a good strategy for a defender, you do after all lose your current structure and all its benefits, but it is most definitely viable for an opportunist third party attacker that just so happens to be in the area. Why go through all the grinding if you can simply drop the hammer for 20 min at the end?
You do have to work for the station, though.
i agree, it hink it'd be better if tcu/ihub followed same mechanics as station.
after new tcu/ihub is launched - it should start spawning nodes in the constellation, just like the freeported station. if more than one entity is contesting sov - they should fight for those nodes, rather than trying to put a large blob on the structure itself.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
256
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 07:08:06 -
[347] - Quote
^ That's a really good idea; it's odd that, after all the design effort that's gone into dispersing the fighting, the final battle allows for, for example, your good selves, to drop a Superball onto the location and ninja it
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 10:57:26 -
[348] - Quote
Any news on when Duality will be back up? |
|
CCP Habakuk
C C P C C P Alliance
1364
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 12:32:49 -
[349] - Quote
Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Any news on when Duality will be back up?
Now. Unfortunately I only saw it now, that the automated startup scripts failed.
CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Gridlock
Bug reporting | Mass Testing
|
|
michael chasseur
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 12:55:01 -
[350] - Quote
info isn't showing on systems now; made a petition
edit: yes my bad also fixed now quick work boys, ez mid gfgf |
|
|
CCP Habakuk
C C P C C P Alliance
1364
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 13:04:45 -
[351] - Quote
michael chasseur wrote:info isn't showing on systems now; made a petition
I hope by "petition" you mean "bug report" (F12 - Report Bug).
CCP Habakuk | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Gridlock
Bug reporting | Mass Testing
|
|
Neddy Fox
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 13:24:22 -
[352] - Quote
CCP Habakuk wrote:Ruune en Gravonere wrote:Any news on when Duality will be back up? Now. Unfortunately I only saw it now, that the automated startup scripts failed.
You mean you aren't running something like Zabbix or Nagios to give you alerts when something fails?
-> Application to CCP as network engineer incoming :)
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 17:54:14 -
[353] - Quote
upgrades not working again at least in our cap system |
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 19:22:48 -
[354] - Quote
Thanks for fixing freeport nodes. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 21:29:23 -
[355] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:And while we're at it, taking sov is still ultimately tied to a single location event when you defend/contest a freshly dropped IHub/TCU. I'm not saying that waiting for that contest is a good strategy for a defender, you do after all lose your current structure and all its benefits, but it is most definitely viable for an opportunist third party attacker that just so happens to be in the area. Why go through all the grinding if you can simply drop the hammer for 20 min at the end?
You do have to work for the station, though. i agree, it hink it'd be better if tcu/ihub followed same mechanics as station. after new tcu/ihub is launched - it should start spawning nodes in the constellation, just like the freeported station. if more than one entity is contesting sov - they should fight for those nodes, rather than trying to put a large blob on the structure itself. ^^
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
112
|
Posted - 2015.06.27 22:00:13 -
[356] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:Warmeister wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:And while we're at it, taking sov is still ultimately tied to a single location event when you defend/contest a freshly dropped IHub/TCU. I'm not saying that waiting for that contest is a good strategy for a defender, you do after all lose your current structure and all its benefits, but it is most definitely viable for an opportunist third party attacker that just so happens to be in the area. Why go through all the grinding if you can simply drop the hammer for 20 min at the end?
You do have to work for the station, though. i agree, it hink it'd be better if tcu/ihub followed same mechanics as station. after new tcu/ihub is launched - it should start spawning nodes in the constellation, just like the freeported station. if more than one entity is contesting sov - they should fight for those nodes, rather than trying to put a large blob on the structure itself. ^^
You mad bro?
maybe you could of spent all day grinding thru 80 station nodes with 40-60mins entosis timers on them all day because concord stations are still bugged and have indexes applied to them still.
Its not that bad of a system you just have to protect one area for 12 mins ... were as in TQ sov you have to protect TCU's for 6h. You failed to protect the tcu and decided to put all your forces in bubbles on the in-gate in a non cyno jammed system. |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
34
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 05:38:04 -
[357] - Quote
There seems to be a an issue with the 0345 eve DT it says it is supposed to come back up in 30mins but the server stays offline till after TQ downtime |
Neddy Fox
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
37
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 08:11:21 -
[358] - Quote
Sadly, Duality didn't restart again today. CCP Habakuk can you fix it? |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
244
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 14:05:19 -
[359] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:I don't know how I feel about changing the mechanic of the TCU and IHUB since there are counters to the drops and what not I mean again this is a test server and the real challenge with be defending what you put down. You basically just have to counter in force as well as ensure you have a cyno inhibitor, mobile or otherwise. Also if you do it right you can drop TCU's and IHUB's simultaneously across the constellation (requires some coordination) to prevent ninjas as well as locate the force that will be dropping in and basically putting your blob on their blob there to ensure capture for yourself. Yes, FozzieSov was supposed to reduce blob warfare but not totally remove it. You just have more moving parts which creates a level of complexity and depth to overall strategy. You can't just wait for reinforce timers and cyno in both forces. It creates roles for hunter's and for tacticians rather than just saying this is reinforced so we are waiting for the timer and putting max dudes to take it. The overall coordination makes this far more interesting and causes people who are in tactical leadership positions to think of multi-layered attack and defense strategies rather than the traditional epeen measuring contest that Dominion SOV created.
Holy wall of text:
I'll address one thing: Fozzie sov is supposed to remove EHP based sov warfare NOT reduce blob warfare. Blob warfare was semi reduced when you have the nodes popping up around the constellation for station capture. It is crazy to think some nerd won't jam 1000 people in a system to do XX at any time. |
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 14:48:08 -
[360] - Quote
Tappits wrote:Gabriel Karade wrote:Warmeister wrote:Lucas Quaan wrote:And while we're at it, taking sov is still ultimately tied to a single location event when you defend/contest a freshly dropped IHub/TCU. I'm not saying that waiting for that contest is a good strategy for a defender, you do after all lose your current structure and all its benefits, but it is most definitely viable for an opportunist third party attacker that just so happens to be in the area. Why go through all the grinding if you can simply drop the hammer for 20 min at the end?
You do have to work for the station, though. i agree, it hink it'd be better if tcu/ihub followed same mechanics as station. after new tcu/ihub is launched - it should start spawning nodes in the constellation, just like the freeported station. if more than one entity is contesting sov - they should fight for those nodes, rather than trying to put a large blob on the structure itself. ^^ You mad bro? maybe you could of spent all day grinding thru 80 station nodes with 40-60mins entosis timers on them all day because concord stations are still bugged and have indexes applied to them still. Its not that bad of a system you just have to protect one area for 12 mins ... were as in TQ sov you have to protect TCU's for 6h. You failed to protect the tcu and decided to put all your forces in bubbles on the in-gate in a non cyno jammed system. Don't be obtuse - you can't cyno jam someone else's system.... (the TCU grid had multiple cyno inhibs, as you were aware).
No, not mad - I think we did all we could in yesterday's fight (pushed the Archon you had, back through the gate when you first tried, killed the Marauders you pushed through, until you finally managed to burn interceptors through the bubble and away from the inhibs to get the initial cyno up...). It just gets immensely frustrating when it appears someone can sit back, with no eyes in system, and know when it's time to drop the Supers and clean up.
Given that this is the feedback thread - feedback provided.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
|
Lisselle Rotsuda
SN Holdings Stella Nova
2
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 20:50:27 -
[361] - Quote
is the testing on Duality really going to continue right up to the TQ launch? I'm afraid we will have to start scaling back our activity on Duality as we prep for the next patch |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
244
|
Posted - 2015.06.28 23:01:28 -
[362] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:is the testing on Duality really going to continue right up to the TQ launch? I'm afraid we will have to start scaling back our activity on Duality as we prep for the next patch
VERY CLEARLY written in the OP:
The competition is expected to begin approximately June 18th and end on July 6th. These dates are all subject to change, but if we do change them we'll give you as much notice as possible. A mass test will likely take place at some point during this time period, which may disrupt the competition temporarily. |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 00:57:47 -
[363] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:is the testing on Duality really going to continue right up to the TQ launch? I'm afraid we will have to start scaling back our activity on Duality as we prep for the next patch VERY CLEARLY written in the OP: The competition is expected to begin approximately June 18th and end on July 6th. These dates are all subject to change, but if we do change them we'll give you as much notice as possible. A mass test will likely take place at some point during this time period, which may disrupt the competition temporarily.
We started later than the original date I was just looking for an update in case it was going to run on closer to the next patch |
Kossaw
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
133
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 03:46:59 -
[364] - Quote
I seem to be able to get the Entosis Module to become stuck fairly reliably
EBR-40669
WTB : An image in my signature
|
Sbrodor
Oscura Simmetria Yulai Federation
148
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 07:07:47 -
[365] - Quote
i have a couple of question:
1) when a node of reinforcemente spawn have a fix 10 min timer or the timer of this single node is influenced by index? and if by index what index: index of starting reinforce structure in base system or in the system where it spawn itself?
2) to Grath Telkin post i want to ask if this scheme is correct:
blob (considering blob a over 100 member gang?) is still a fact in eve so in field is unthinkable to cycle enthosis with subcapital ship due the impossibility to create a ship not volleyed istant out from grid.
so the escalation to capital ship is still the only option to deploy a ship capable of hold the field for some minuts? |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
114
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 07:55:13 -
[366] - Quote
Sbrodor wrote:i have a couple of question:
1) when a node of reinforcemente spawn have a fix 10 min timer or the timer of this single node is influenced by index? and if by index what index: index of starting reinforce structure in base system or in the system where it spawn itself?
2) to Grath Telkin post i want to ask if this scheme is correct:
blob (considering blob a over 100 member gang?) is still a fact in eve so in field is unthinkable to cycle enthosis with subcapital ship due the impossibility to create a ship not volleyed istant out from grid.
so the escalation to capital ship is still the only option to deploy a ship capable of hold the field for some minuts?
1: You mean the command nodes? Everything is affecting by the indexes if there is any. The system the nodes are for affect them. 2: DonGÇÖt try and use an entosis mod while thereGÇÖs a 100man fleet on grid with you then.
|
|
CCP Masterplan
C C P C C P Alliance
1704
|
Posted - 2015.06.29 10:48:50 -
[367] - Quote
Sbrodor wrote:i have a couple of question:
1) when a node of reinforcemente spawn have a fix 10 min timer or the timer of this single node is influenced by index? and if by index what index: index of starting reinforce structure in base system or in the system where it spawn itself? [snip]
When a structure becomes vulnerable, all events that are triggered as a result of that vulnerable window will use the same Activity Defense Multiplier value, until either the structure is lost, or the defender regains full control.
In more detail: When a structure ends its daily vulnerable window, it samples the Activity Defense Multiplier for the solarsystem at that point, and then schedules tomorrow's vulnerable window for the structure. This window includes the start and end time (obviously), but also the multiplier that will apply between those times (let's call that value M). Whatever happens to the index levels in the solarsystem after that will have no effect until the defenders re-secure the structure. The next day, the structure enters its vulnerable window, with capture multiplier M. If it becomes reinforced by the attackers during this window, it will then schedule the command node event using that also uses the same multiplier M. When the command nodes start spawning a day or so later, they will also use the same multiplier M that we started with.
"This one time, on patch day..."
@ccp_masterplan | Team Five-0: Rewriting the law
|
|
Douglas Aurelius
Sanctuary of Shadows Triumvirate.
1
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 04:14:51 -
[368] - Quote
Spectre Fleet Alliance just had all of its holding in the I9B-8X constellation put into reinforcement past our vulnerability period. The first of the structures was hit at around 01:50 according to notifications which should have been as much as 2 hours after their vulnerable timer. We didn't have many people on at the time and we're attempting to see if any of them saw first hand to confirm if they were still visually reading as vulnerable or if they read as invulnerable and were still able to be entosis linked.
We had encountered a bug in this area earlier in the games where we were able to reinforce the area without the defensive multiplier taking effect. Not sure if that helps but both were firsts, will attempt to find anything else out on our end. If anyone that was part of the RFing can comment that would probably be helpful to determine if it was a bug on the structure vulnerability end or the system for properly showing when the vulnerability is that would be appreciated. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 07:57:20 -
[369] - Quote
CCP Masterplan wrote: When a structure becomes vulnerable, all events that are triggered as a result of that vulnerable window will use the same Activity Defense Multiplier value, until either the structure is lost, or the defender regains full control.
In more detail: When a structure ends its daily vulnerable window, it samples the Activity Defense Multiplier for the solarsystem at that point, and then schedules tomorrow's vulnerable window for the structure. This window includes the start and end time (obviously), but also the multiplier that will apply between those times (let's call that value M). Whatever happens to the index levels in the solarsystem after that will have no effect until the defenders re-secure the structure. The next day, the structure enters its vulnerable window, with capture multiplier M. If it becomes reinforced by the attackers during this window, it will then schedule the command node event using that also uses the same multiplier M. When the command nodes start spawning a day or so later, they will also use the same multiplier M that we started with.
Who's considered a defender when multiple alliances own the structure? Is it always the structure owner? Do the defense multipliers apply regardless of who owns the other structures?
Say if attacker has managed to capture one of the structures in someone's system with high indexes, will they now be benefiting from those indexes if the defending alliance tries to recapture it? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13040
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 09:58:56 -
[370] - Quote
Douglas Aurelius wrote:Spectre Fleet Alliance just had all of its holding in the I9B-8X constellation put into reinforcement past our vulnerability period. The first of the structures was hit at around 01:50 according to notifications which should have been as much as 2 hours after their vulnerable timer. We didn't have many people on at the time and we're attempting to see if any of them saw first hand to confirm if they were still visually reading as vulnerable or if they read as invulnerable and were still able to be entosis linked.
We had encountered a bug in this area earlier in the games where we were able to reinforce the area without the defensive multiplier taking effect. Not sure if that helps but both were firsts, will attempt to find anything else out on our end. If anyone that was part of the RFing can comment that would probably be helpful to determine if it was a bug on the structure vulnerability end or the system for properly showing when the vulnerability is that would be appreciated.
Looking at the logs, the systems hit last night have fairly low defense multipliers (1x and 1.6x) and Spectre Fleet's vulnerability timer is 22:00. That means the period in which the structures were hit should have been well within their vulnerability windows. Remember that the size of each structure's vulnerability window is tied to the defense multiplier in its star system, so the window will have different sizes for structures in different systems.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13040
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 10:00:15 -
[371] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:CCP Masterplan wrote: When a structure becomes vulnerable, all events that are triggered as a result of that vulnerable window will use the same Activity Defense Multiplier value, until either the structure is lost, or the defender regains full control.
In more detail: When a structure ends its daily vulnerable window, it samples the Activity Defense Multiplier for the solarsystem at that point, and then schedules tomorrow's vulnerable window for the structure. This window includes the start and end time (obviously), but also the multiplier that will apply between those times (let's call that value M). Whatever happens to the index levels in the solarsystem after that will have no effect until the defenders re-secure the structure. The next day, the structure enters its vulnerable window, with capture multiplier M. If it becomes reinforced by the attackers during this window, it will then schedule the command node event using that also uses the same multiplier M. When the command nodes start spawning a day or so later, they will also use the same multiplier M that we started with.
Who's considered a defender when multiple alliances own the structures in the system? Is it always the structure owner? Do the defense multipliers apply regardless of who owns the other structures? Say if attacker has managed to capture one of the structures in someone's system with high indexes, will they now be benefiting from those indexes if the defending alliance tries to recapture it?
The owner of the structure is always the defender. And the activity defense multiplier (other than the capital system bonus) applies to all owned structures in the system no matter their owner.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
94
|
Posted - 2015.06.30 10:07:29 -
[372] - Quote
Sbrodor wrote: blob (considering blob a over 100 member gang?) is still a fact in eve so in field is unthinkable to cycle enthosis with subcapital ship due the impossibility to create a ship not volleyed istant out from grid.
The 100 member gang can only be in one place at a time. So by the time that 100 member gang manages to volley a couple of your entosis ships, meanwhile in a different location, 10 of your guys are finishing nodes. Depending on defense multipliers, that might give you the advantage.
A 100 member gang is also 100 people not sitting on a node running an entosis link. Congrats, you just managed to neutralize 100 opponents by trading in a couple of ships.
In fact, wasting a large number of your people to roam around and hunt down entosis linkers has proofen to be a bad strategy on duality because of that. Factor in a possibly +5ish defense multiplier to your advantage and you have the sufficient number of nodes finished by the time that blob has done 3 jumps in tidi over 9000. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 00:02:33 -
[373] - Quote
The new system icons in top left corner are so ugly. Can we please have the old ones back?
They look like someone has done a very bad job at photoshoping the circle out. |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
34
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 03:39:27 -
[374] - Quote
Some of the system's vulnerability timers are still bugged and do not show up |
Zibru Povens
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 06:11:23 -
[375] - Quote
Since the new system is heavily depending on what constellation a system is in, do you plan to add a direct link between the Show Info window of a system and the Show Info window of it's constellation?
At the moment the Show Info of a system says what constellation a system is in at the top but it's not possible to interact with it (for example, to check what other systems are in the same constellation). The lack of a link between the system and constellation Show Info windows is especially disappointing because the 'Adjacent Solar System' tab doesn't say if those systems are in the same constellation or not and because the 'Location' tab on the Show Info window of a station links directly to the Region, Constellation and System. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13041
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 10:28:06 -
[376] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:Some of the system's vulnerability timers are still bugged and do not show up Can you let us know which structures are experiencing the problem? Either here or through a bug report would work.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13041
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 13:47:06 -
[377] - Quote
Most recent timer list:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.01 19:32 WJ-9YO Station Freeport 1 2015.07.01 22:45 2V-CS5 IHub Defense Pandemic Legion 2.6 2015.07.01 18:22 D61A-G Station Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1 2015.07.01 20:10 D61A-G IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1 2015.07.01 16:28 D61A-G TCU Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1 2015.07.01 19:26 Y-MPWL IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.01 20:04 D-6WS1 TCU Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.01 23:43 D-6WS1 Station Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.01 20:16 D-6WS1 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.02 03:33 Y-MPWL TCU Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.01 22:42 Y-MPWL Station Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.6 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13041
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 13:53:11 -
[378] - Quote
We've received some questions about whether newly deployed outposts will count towards alliance scores for the competition. Since testing the outpost deployment process in the new system is valuable we will count new outposts. However we want to make sure that there is time for people to wrest control of all newly deployed outposts before the end of the competition.
Therefore any outpost that is successfully deployed before 11:00 EVETime on Friday July 3rd will count towards alliance points for the competition, and any outposts deployed after that time will not.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1324
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 15:52:37 -
[379] - Quote
Lisselle Rotsuda wrote:is the testing on Duality really going to continue right up to the TQ launch? I'm afraid we will have to start scaling back our activity on Duality as we prep for the next patch
Although Aegis deploys on July 7, the capture mechanics come to TQ the week after - July 14th.
~
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
34
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 18:57:23 -
[380] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Ryno Caval wrote:Some of the system's vulnerability timers are still bugged and do not show up Can you let us know which structures are experiencing the problem? Either here or through a bug report would work.
At first I was only checking a few systems but it seems a majority of the systems are showing an unknown Vulnerability window if they are not showing they are already vulnerable.
Also it would be nice to see a timer on structure that are vulnerable that said when they would go back into Invulnerability so that both the defending side and the attacking side could know how much time they had to attack or defend parts of a constellation. I understand that after a structure has been attacked it remains vulnerable until it is defended but It would be nice to look at the SOV window and know how much time is left to attack or defend.
Obviously, there will be OOG game tools made by players to do this but for smaller alliances that might not have web development savvy people in it, who can't necessarily make these tools it would be nice to be able to see. I already know that major alliances have web developers and programmers that are in them because of the sheer number of people and the culture of people that play EVE there are bound to be people with these skills in these major alliances/coalitions but for the little guys it is less likely so having something in game would be nice. |
|
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 21:31:42 -
[381] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4
What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion.
|
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
35
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 21:36:12 -
[382] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion.
It has the Alliance Capital Modifier |
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 21:54:19 -
[383] - Quote
Ryno Caval wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. It has the Alliance Capital Modifier
Wouldn't it be awesome, the sov tab would clearly show you the exact effective multiplier for each structure instead of one thats obviously not relevant? |
Ryno Caval
House of Praetor Fidelas Constans
35
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 22:12:09 -
[384] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:Ryno Caval wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. It has the Alliance Capital Modifier Wouldn't it be awesome, the sov tab would clearly show you the exact effective multiplier for each structure instead of one thats obviously not relevant?
I completely agree with you I think the problem is that no one else had an Alliance Capital system or has had it attacked yet or what not it is clearly an issue with the in-game display for specific structures, or maybe CCP is being nice to FCON cause we are going out swinging who knows. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
244
|
Posted - 2015.07.01 22:27:33 -
[385] - Quote
This may help explain some of it: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5852612#post5852612
That being said, the active defense multiplier affecting the system and object capture **SHOULD** be available somewhere |
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.07.02 10:08:26 -
[386] - Quote
is the bills we're receiving in duality the real value it'll be on TQ at the launch? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13043
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 09:13:19 -
[387] - Quote
Redwyne Vyruk wrote:is the bills we're receiving in duality the real value it'll be on TQ at the launch? No, the bills are currently set to lower values in this build. You can expect overall costs to stay the same in this release, with the major change being the TCU cost being moved to the IHub.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Goliath
C C P C C P Alliance
2687
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 09:20:31 -
[388] - Quote
Just to say that we are aware that Duality is currently experiencing some locking conflicts and that the server is unstable and reasonably unusable at the moment. We are investigating and will hopefully have it resolved very soon.
CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13043
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 09:21:53 -
[389] - Quote
Upcoming reinforcement timers:
Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.03 21:04 H6-CX8 TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 2015.07.03 18:59 4B-NQN TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.03 23:16 4B-NQN IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.03 20:14 YWS0-Z IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.03 21:21 YWS0-Z TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.03 20:15 YWS0-Z Station Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.03 17:45 9-F0B2 Station Spectre Fleet Alliance 1 2015.07.04 02:03 9-F0B2 TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 1 2015.07.03 20:16 B-WPLZ IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.4 2015.07.04 19:31 H6-CX8 Station Freeport 1 2015.07.05 02:57 D61A-G Station Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.4 2015.07.04 17:58 D61A-G TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.4 2015.07.05 02:45 D61A-G IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.4 2015.07.05 01:59 Shintaht IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.04 18:59 Shintaht TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.04 18:38 Shintaht Station Spectre Fleet Alliance 2.2 2015.07.04 22:09 49GC-R IHub Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.4 2015.07.04 16:27 49GC-R TCU Spectre Fleet Alliance 1.4
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
CCP Goliath
C C P C C P Alliance
2687
|
Posted - 2015.07.03 09:31:17 -
[390] - Quote
We recompiled a misfiring notifications proc and this has fixed the problem. If you are currently logged in you will need to relog to experience things correctly.
CCP Goliath | QA Director | EVE Illuminati | @CCP_Goliath
|
|
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 12:02:32 -
[391] - Quote
Just a minor thing (sure you'll be doing it anyway); on the attributes tab, there's still the legacy 'anchoring'/'unanchoring' e.t.c delay times mentioned - obviously we all know that those aren't relevant, but could still cause some confusion when it hits TQ.
(also the description on the TCU)
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 12:25:11 -
[392] - Quote
So, just seen a TCU with a 57 hour RF timer, is that kosher?
(9-F0B2)
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 13:04:48 -
[393] - Quote
Gabriel Karade wrote:So, just seen a TCU with a 57 hour RF timer, is that kosher?
(9-F0B2)
The system only has a 1,4 defense multiplier, so the vulnerability window is big. It was probably reinforced right after it exited vulnerability, so in addition to the ~48h of regular reinforced time are 9ish hours between the time it was reinforced and the prime time of the defending alliance.
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.04 13:12:43 -
[394] - Quote
Edit: nvm - understood, guessing it just happened to pick a random time towards the back-end of the vulnerability window, hence the +9 hours.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 00:30:13 -
[395] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Redwyne Vyruk wrote:is the bills we're receiving in duality the real value it'll be on TQ at the launch? No, the bills are currently set to lower values in this build. You can expect overall costs to stay the same as current TQ numbers in this release, with the major change being the TCU cost being moved to the IHub.
tyvm for the answer |
Jayne Fillon
737
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 00:39:41 -
[396] - Quote
When is the official end of the tournament, 24hr or 48hr?
I don't see a specific time listed other than simply the 6th of July.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2566
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 00:48:42 -
[397] - Quote
Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. Did they lose ihub/tcu before or after timer started? |
Jayne Fillon
737
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 00:53:27 -
[398] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. Did they lose ihub/tcu before or after timer started? H6 was FCON's Capital unless I'm crazy.
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
244
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 01:06:09 -
[399] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:When is the official end of the tournament, 24hr or 48hr?
I don't see a specific time listed other than simply the 6th of July.
Why wouldn't it be DT 11:00, that is 24 hours before patch (although this stuff doesn't come out in the patch) I am sure CCP devs will be busy with patch stuff and we start to wrap up last minute details on the test |
Zibru Povens
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 07:04:24 -
[400] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:When is the official end of the tournament, 24hr or 48hr?
I don't see a specific time listed other than simply the 6th of July.
In chat on Duality, Fozzie said the contest ends on Monday at 1100. |
|
Dizzop Bengal
Chamber Militant
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 08:01:17 -
[401] - Quote
In the corp menu under "alliances" under the "sovereignty" tab. When sorting by timer the ongoing timers are under the reinforced timers. This is slightly confusing, Is it possible to adjust the sorting to make the ongoing ones appear above the reinforcement timers? or is there a reason for them to appear above the ongoing ones? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2566
|
Posted - 2015.07.05 22:52:47 -
[402] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:Rowells wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. Did they lose ihub/tcu before or after timer started? H6 was FCON's Capital unless I'm crazy. Now that you mention it, it does sound familiar. However I haven't been on there in a while, so I have no idea what has happened since then. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 06:50:18 -
[403] - Quote
so when is the raffle gonna take place? |
Heinrich Rotwang
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
95
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 09:09:13 -
[404] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Heinrich Rotwang wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Most recent timer list: Exit Time Solar System Structure Owning Alliance Defense Multiplier 2015.07.02 16:11 H6-CX8 Station Defense Fidelas Constans 6 2015.07.02 20:03 H6-CX8 IHub Defense Spectre Fleet Alliance 3.4 What I dont get is, how the H6 station can still have a 6x defense multiplier. They lost the TCU and the IHub and when I open the sov info tab it says 3.4 and rapidly dropping. Is there 3 different multipliers even tho there is only one visible and others are hidden or ... ? Confusion. Did they lose ihub/tcu before or after timer started?
AFAIR the other sov structures were gone by the time we reinforced the station, but the effective multiplier being calculated ahead of time explains it. I knew it was the FCON HQ - just didn't know the value is always a fixed one (guilty !rtfm)
I think a lot of the complexity comes once again from the UI. If the 3 rows in the sov tab representing the 3 sov structures would simply show the actual effective multiplier for the state the structure is currently in, everything would be fine. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13045
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 11:10:25 -
[405] - Quote
And the competition is officially over!
Final scores are: Pandemic Legion: 198 Spectre Fleet Alliance: 40 No Not Believing: 35 Affirmative.: 22 Fidelas Constans: 7
Big congrats to everyone who participated, especially to the final five alliances.
I've drawn the winners for the module naming using Chribba's dice, and those results will be revealed in an upcoming dev blog.
Remember that the drawn alliances don't get to name the module whatever they want. The default is for the alliance ticker of the winning alliances to be added to the name, and we're willing to consider other suggestions from the winning alliances as long as they completely and totally fit into the EVE universe. The bar for alternate suggestions is extremely high, and we expect to use the ticker for most of the modules.
Remember that Duality remains open and can still be used for testing, bug reporting and getting acquainted with the new system. We have another internal build ready to deploy soon that has another big batch of UI updates thanks to your feedback.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Neddy Fox
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
37
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 11:30:52 -
[406] - Quote
And Stella Nova ? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13047
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 11:35:34 -
[407] - Quote
Neddy Fox wrote:And Stella Nova ?
Stella Nova's starting constellation was taken by No Not Believing
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
BlitZ Kotare
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
134
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 11:37:55 -
[408] - Quote
Cool, looking forward to UI updates. How soon can we expect Duality to be reconfigured for AT testing? |
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 12:54:05 -
[409] - Quote
Yeah the games went on a just a bit too long we ended up having to put all our efforts into TQ over the weekend |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1325
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:12:29 -
[410] - Quote
We did it!
~
|
|
Jayne Fillon
737
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:13:00 -
[411] - Quote
I'm assuming there are 4 meta modules that will be named?
Also, was the requirement for participants to "capture at least one system within the competition area" met by all 5 alliances?
Can't shoot blues if you don't have any. Long Live NPSI.
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13049
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:18:50 -
[412] - Quote
Jayne Fillon wrote:I'm assuming there are 4 meta modules that will be named?
Also, was the requirement for participants to "capture at least one system within the competition area" met by all 5 alliances? Yup four out of the five Alliances left will get modules named after them. Which ones exactly will be revealed in an upcoming dev blog.
As for the "capture at least one system" requirement, it was for getting named in the BPO, not for the drawing itself. We'll be pretty generous with that prize though, everyone who was active testing the new system in just about any significant way will get their names on the BPO.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
Redwyne Vyruk
Tr0pa de elite. Pandemic Legion
9
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 14:21:46 -
[413] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Jayne Fillon wrote:I'm assuming there are 4 meta modules that will be named?
Also, was the requirement for participants to "capture at least one system within the competition area" met by all 5 alliances? Yup four out of the five Alliances left will get modules named after them. Which ones exactly will be revealed in an upcoming dev blog. As for the "capture at least one system" requirement, it was for getting named in the BPO, not for the drawing itself. We'll be pretty generous with that prize though, everyone who was active testing the new system in just about any significant way will get their names on the BPO.
ETA for dev blog? quite interested :) |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
2765
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 15:15:43 -
[414] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:And the competition is officially over!
Final scores are: Pandemic Legion: 198 Spectre Fleet Alliance: 40 No Not Believing: 35 Affirmative.: 22 Fidelas Constans: 7
Big congrats to everyone who participated, especially to the final five alliances.
I've drawn the winners for the module naming using Chribba's dice, and those results will be revealed in an upcoming dev blog.
Remember that the drawn alliances don't get to name the module whatever they want. The default is for the alliance ticker of the winning alliances to be added to the name, and we're willing to consider other suggestions from the winning alliances as long as they completely and totally fit into the EVE universe. The bar for alternate suggestions is extremely high, and we expect to use the ticker for most of the modules.
Remember that Duality remains open and can still be used for testing, bug reporting and getting acquainted with the new system. We have another internal build ready to deploy soon that has another big batch of UI updates thanks to your feedback.
Honestly been kicking this around trying to figure out a non poop way to get [-10] into a name, nothing seemed to work our right at all or even come close to looking good, so then i started looking at our name and emblem, the best Ive got as far as sounding non crap I've come up with is the Legion's Viral Entosis Link.
Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
|
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
115
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 17:55:40 -
[415] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Honestly been kicking this around trying to figure out a non poop way to get [-10] into a name, nothing seemed to work our right at all or even come close to looking good, so then i started looking at our name and emblem, the best Ive got as far as sounding non crap I've come up with is the Legion's Viral Entosis Link.
What about the GÇ£Telkin Unstable Entosis link IGÇ¥ A really angry mod that takes a lot of fitting with good range and reasonable cap use and has a 2min 30s cycle time.
CPU 15 Powergrid usage 120 Activation cost 450 Gj Optimal range 150 km Activation time 150 s Meta 4 Stront 1
|
Ruune en Gravonere
Running with Dogs Stella Nova
36
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 18:54:15 -
[416] - Quote
IN our defence we did take a system and would have given NO NOT a fight... if we'd turned up
But congrats all the winners and everyone who helped test the new sov... I'm pretty sure we all learned a lot and the final product is much improved by all the feedback...
Its all about having supportive 'critical friends' |
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1325
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 19:02:25 -
[417] - Quote
I'm gonna laugh so hard when PL doesn't get a name on any module. Can we make our own lore post tho?
~
|
Gabriel Karade
Noir. No Not Believing
258
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:08:09 -
[418] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Neddy Fox wrote:And Stella Nova ? Stella Nova's starting constellation was taken by No Not Believing That was the longest period I've remained logged into Eve in 11 years...
#Nerds4Life
Edit:
Bridged a Freighter out to setup 'Siege' tower around 10:00 ish, logged for a bit, back on around 14:00, crawled into bed sometime after 00:00... I think.
Entosis'ing node times, best of times.
War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
|
utec asmo
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 20:48:55 -
[419] - Quote
Inb4 the 0,3% chance strikes and PL isn't one of the four named alliances. |
Tappits
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
115
|
Posted - 2015.07.06 22:55:47 -
[420] - Quote
Elise Randolph wrote:I'm gonna laugh so hard when PL doesn't get a name on any module. Can we make our own lore post tho?
Good keeping our name off the thing that killed eve is a good thing tbh |
|
Elise Randolph
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
1326
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 07:10:25 -
[421] - Quote
Woah you need to calm down I think
~
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
13
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 13:59:37 -
[422] - Quote
how bout that dev blog |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13052
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 15:25:29 -
[423] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:how bout that dev blog http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/summer-of-sov-transition-and-deployment/
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
JEFFRAIDER
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
382
|
Posted - 2015.07.07 15:29:41 -
[424] - Quote
Pandemic Legion's Modified Viral Entosis Link I
pls :) |
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
419
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 00:05:23 -
[425] - Quote
Minus Ten 'to your sanity' Modified Entosis Link. |
Greygal
Redemption Road Affirmative.
470
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 02:34:45 -
[426] - Quote
Affirmative. Compact Entosis Link YES Restrained Entosis Link
\o/
Congrats to all!
What you do for yourself dies with you, what you do for others is immortal.
Free weekly public roams & monthly NewBro new player roams!
Visit Redemption Road or join mailing list REDEMPTION ROAMS for information
|
Alekseyev Karrde
Noir. No Not Believing
1718
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:13:54 -
[427] - Quote
The TRUST Entosis Link has such a nice ring to it XD
The Duality testing was a lot of fun all around. Props to PL, FCON, and BRAVE for the good fights and learning opportuntiies.
Major props to my own pilots like Gabriel who were absolutely beasting.
The system itself is a major improvement over Dominion sov.
The single biggest pain point was the ease with which TCU and iHUBs could be super blobbed and ninja'd. Being able to RF nodes dispersed throughout the entire constellation was great but having to converge on a single point after that work to watch Super-Supported Triage carriers claim the prize was a frequent source of frustration.
The other main issue was the UI and a general sense of not knowing what was going on in the other areas in terms of gains/losses. The UI improved a lot during the course of the test though so I'm reasonably confident it will catch up.
"Alekseyev Karrde: mercenary of my heart."
-Arydanika, Voices from the Void
Hero of the CSM
Noir./Noir. Academy Recruiting: www.noirmercs.com
|
Zibru Povens
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
14
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 16:44:39 -
[428] - Quote
http://imgur.com/tKBrWtB
Thanks Fozzie |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
13066
|
Posted - 2015.07.11 21:27:32 -
[429] - Quote
karkur made the change, I just passed the request along.
Game Designer | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie
http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: [one page] |