Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 05:35:00 -
[61]
just an idea but would it be possible to link weapons together WHILE still having the individual weapon icons accessible? so say I'm blasting away at an enemy ships with my turrets while locking a nearby pod. rather than stopping the whole 8 linked weapons to kill the pod I just stop one and 1 shot the pod... when I do this the weapon I used came out of the 8 linked weapon group...
just a thought and I know that could cause your module window to come very clogged but meh....
also sweet feature and good work ccp... now if you could just put the trade item 'duct tape' in the game and fix mining agents I'd be happy =)
ccp fix mining agent missions % pls |
Pliauga
Gallente Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 06:06:00 -
[62]
KUDOS CCP
---------- DRONE love rulez!! 'mkay?! LONG range/"OUT OF SYSTEM" artillery |
Franga
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 07:35:00 -
[63]
Oh, this is fantastic. |
Matthew
Caldari BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 07:46:00 -
[64]
One potential mega-missile concern that I didn't see addressed is how the NPC logic for defender missiles will handle it. As I understand it, NPCs that have defenders use a simple % chance of launching a defender per missile fired at it.
If the mega-missile only counts as one missile fired, this is going to give a clear advantage to the mega-missile over individual launchers when fighting defender-equipped NPCs. Presumably the NPCs will be able to know how many normal missiles a mega-missile is equivalent to, and make the appropriate number of "launch defender" rolls. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Mr Horizontal
Gallente KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 08:24:00 -
[65]
I don't like the fact you can't have more than one weapon type in the groups. Have you considered that Minmatar ships due to their 'versatility' usually have to have a couple of missile launchers and guns to maximise their DPS?
Or a lot of BS fittings require one weapon to be of lower PG to be able to fit it?
Or be able to group things like remote reppers?
Still a step in the right direction I suppose, but by no means perfect...
Chairman | www.eve-bank.net |
Moraguth
Amarr Shiva Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 09:20:00 -
[66]
So how would this work....
Let's say I'm in my apoc, ratting or something, and i have my 8 mega pulse IIs linked together into one icon. Then, some bastard comes in and scrambles me and starts draining the hell outta my cap. When this happens, some of my modules deactivate, but some of them keep running.
What is the 1 grouped module going to do when half the guns get turned off because of outside interference (someone nossing my cap for example)? Will I have to ungroup my modules during combat to make sure I can see which ones are still firing and to spam the buttons to try to make the others fire as soon as I get more cap? |
adriaans
Amarr Ankaa.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 09:26:00 -
[67]
looks great! |
bldyannoyed
Killed In Action
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 09:43:00 -
[68]
One question to people that have used it on sisi.
How does heat work?
I know for a fact that when overloading a rack of guns they dont all take heat damage at the smae time. Even if its just a full rack of guns with no empty slots and no heat-sink modules the heat distribution is not even. That being the case, with the guns all grouped together into one icon how the hell are you supposed to keep an eye out for the one rogue gun that wants to burn itself out 30 seconds before the rest of the group?
|
Sun Liping
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 09:54:00 -
[69]
Originally by: Typhado3 just an idea but would it be possible to link weapons together WHILE still having the individual weapon icons accessible?
I would also much prefer having the single weapon icons for individual fire control as they are now, as well as one additional weapon group icon when i engage a single target.
With the probable exception of fleet battles you will always need the flexibility individual turret firing provides. My guess is with the current implementation it wont see that much use, reducing the expected loadreduction for the server, since everybody would simply stick to having a macro key on my keyboard set to fire f1-f8 on one press or pressing them individually. |
Doxs Roxs
Free Collective Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 11:15:00 -
[70]
****ing awesome!!! Implement this **** asap, like NOW! Finally I can have all my active modules on the F1-F8 slot without resorting to stupid ctrl + alt shortcuts.
Regards /Doxs |
|
SeerinDarkness
Minmatar An Tir Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 11:19:00 -
[71]
And this was something that the dev team originally said would never happen because they diden't want to promote/allow automated game play like this. And i agree with them, so why are we going to this kind of automated crap? make no sense to me and appears to be a total reversal of Game design policy. Now its going to be about how fast a person can push 1 key for the insta-damage/pop..what a letdown. Seer |
Matthew
Caldari BloodStar Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 11:58:00 -
[72]
Originally by: Moraguth What is the 1 grouped module going to do when half the guns get turned off because of outside interference (someone nossing my cap for example)? Will I have to ungroup my modules during combat to make sure I can see which ones are still firing and to spam the buttons to try to make the others fire as soon as I get more cap?
I would expect that when the modules are grouped, the group will be treated as a single activation for these purposes. i.e. you will need enough capacitor to be able to fire the whole group at once. If you don't, then none of the group will fire.
You would have to ungroup your weapons in this situation if you wanted to try and maintain fire from a smaller number of them. ------- There is no magic Wand of Fixing, and it is not powered by forum whines. |
Tamillia
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 12:05:00 -
[73]
Okay i realize this probably wont affect that many people, but from what i understand of this feature defender missiles will reduse the damage of a "super" missile by a % of what damage it does to it.
Now i do missions in torp golem, and defender missiles doesn't hurt my torps so they are in effect immune to defenders.
Now with this change i will suddenly get a 25-50% damage reduction due to the fact that missions rats can shoot 1 or 2 defenders againt each volly i do.
This doen't seem like it a good idea imo, eventhough i have been wantet a mass reload/fire fuction for a long time now.
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 15:15:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Rockstara
no seems like they are thinking of most things. I'm sure something will come up in testing, but hey thats what testing is for. The hit calculation is only one in a long stream...read up
With all due respect, there hasn't been a dev post in this thread so far. We have no way of knowing that they're doing everything right, at the moment we have to take their word for it that any and all issues associated with weapon stacking have been thought of, explored and dealt with. And while they generally do a good job, some really obvious problems and exploits have slipped through in previous patches that convince me the only way to make sure the new system is adequate is to publicise the nitty gritty details. EVE's community has a wealth of talent in it, including programmers and mathematicians. If there's a problem with the mechanics of the stacking system, they'll find it. Ideally, we'd like any problems to be exposed before the feature goes live so they can be corrected and not afterward when they can be exploited.
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:04:00 -
[75]
Lots of questions in here, I will answer some now.
Originally by: jbob2000 Why couldn't weapon grouping be a simple hot key hash? I was beginning to wonder why this was listed as a key feature in the new expansion when it should be something extremely simple. You've made this system far too complex. All it needs to do is allow us to fire all 8 guns with 1 key. That's it. I don't really need to use the rest of the F2-F8 keys cause i have F9-F11 for MWD, Reps, drones, etc.
I foresee many problems with this system.
This is technically what is this design achieving at the time being. You group modules of the same type which is activated with one button. You save F2-F8 shortcut for other module activation, which is very convenient for quick keyboard access. On a more general picture, the point was not only to provide more player usability by allowing commands to be applied to several modules but also help with general performance.
We went for the current UI approach because having grouped modules shown in a "row link" instead of stack would have cluttered the module UI too much and not provide the free shortcut advantage explained before.
Originally by: Dmian Two simple questions:
-Can you group weapons at the Fitting screen? (like Shift-drag&dropping one weapon over the other or something like that)
-Will there be a "Right-button > Ungroup all weapons" option?
Thanks. Great work!
Yes you can if all limitations listed in the Blog are respected (no ammo, same exact type, same state). Just hold shift then drag and drop the modules and here you go. You cannot clear all groups with one button, just right-click each and select "Clear group" instead. Come on, it is only a few extra more clicks .
Originally by: Dav Varan
Question
If I have guns with the same stats but different names will I be able to stack them ? True Sansha / Dark Blood etc
Request
While your tinkering with the context menu can you please put the ammo list into some sort of order ( alphabetical would be nice ) hint.
Unfortunately not, the modules need to be exactly the same. Regarding your ammo classification request, you should post into this category instead.
Originally by: Typhado3 just an idea but would it be possible to link weapons together WHILE still having the individual weapon icons accessible? so say I'm blasting away at an enemy ships with my turrets while locking a nearby pod. rather than stopping the whole 8 linked weapons to kill the pod I just stop one and 1 shot the pod... when I do this the weapon I used came out of the 8 linked weapon group...
just a thought and I know that could cause your module window to come very clogged but meh....
We are not planning to do this for the reasons explained before or until a design tremor happens. As somebody else mentionned, you can always create two groups of fewer weapons rather than one big one to help in that situation however.
Originally by: Mr Horizontal I don't like the fact you can't have more than one weapon type in the groups. Have you considered that Minmatar ships due to their 'versatility' usually have to have a couple of missile launchers and guns to maximise their DPS?
Or a lot of BS fittings require one weapon to be of lower PG to be able to fit it?
Or be able to group things like remote reppers?
Still a step in the right direction I suppose, but by no means perfect...
Again, nothing prevents you from creating two stacks, one for turrets and the other for missiles. About being able to group other module types, this is something we will be considering in the future. Is the system perfect? Of course not, we had to overcome extremely difficult choices since lots of people had good ideas during the design process. Is it the best possible solution we could come up with? I believe so. |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:05:00 -
[76]
Originally by: SeerinDarkness And this was something that the dev team originally said would never happen because they diden't want to promote/allow automated game play like this.
And i agree with them, so why are we going to this kind of automated crap? make no sense to me and appears to be a total reversal of Game design policy. Now its going to be about how fast a person can push 1 key for the insta-damage/pop..what a letdown. Seer
As you stated it yourself, one still needs to be pressing the button to activate the stack so interaction is still needed. We are coming up with this to answer player concerns about lag and usability, I believe it to be a proof we do listen and care to our player base on the contrary. We perfectly understand and are sorry you may not like this feature, but on such case, nothing forces you to use it: it remains a UI option.
Originally by: Nyphur
With all due respect, there hasn't been a dev post in this thread so far. We have no way of knowing that they're doing everything right, at the moment we have to take their word for it that any and all issues associated with weapon stacking have been thought of, explored and dealt with. And while they generally do a good job, some really obvious problems and exploits have slipped through in previous patches that convince me the only way to make sure the new system is adequate is to publicise the nitty gritty details. EVE's community has a wealth of talent in it, including programmers and mathematicians. If there's a problem with the mechanics of the stacking system, they'll find it. Ideally, we'd like any problems to be exposed before the feature goes live so they can be corrected and not afterward when they can be exploited.
Which is why I am answering this thread right now We are fully aware how valuable the community is, but keep in mind that writting up proper replies take time, because we need to double, even triple-check the information before sending it. Doing so also takes an amazing amount of time, which we usually sadly cannot afford to spend right after you submitted a post since we are caught in other duties.
I am fully aware of your good point in the other thread, but replying requires technical details that I cannot give myself at the moment. I am a Dev, not a programmer, some of my duties are to write up designs, weight-up mechanism choices regarding of balance, overal situtation, feedback, experience, check, text if they are properly implemented to match the original goals. I do not take care of the exact code implementation, and you honestly don't want me to tamper with the programming part because this is not what I was hired to do. However, I will poke around to see if I can get you the answer you deserve. |
|
Glassback
Body Count Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 16:32:00 -
[77]
I'm mehh.
|
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:27:00 -
[78]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium
Originally by: Nyphur
With all due respect, there hasn't been a dev post in this thread so far. We have no way of knowing that they're doing everything right, at the moment we have to take their word for it that any and all issues associated with weapon stacking have been thought of, explored and dealt with. And while they generally do a good job, some really obvious problems and exploits have slipped through in previous patches that convince me the only way to make sure the new system is adequate is to publicise the nitty gritty details. EVE's community has a wealth of talent in it, including programmers and mathematicians. If there's a problem with the mechanics of the stacking system, they'll find it. Ideally, we'd like any problems to be exposed before the feature goes live so they can be corrected and not afterward when they can be exploited.
Which is why I am answering this thread right now We are fully aware how valuable the community is, but keep in mind that writting up proper replies take time, because we need to double, even triple-check the information before sending it. Doing so also takes an amazing amount of time, which we usually sadly cannot afford to spend right after you submitted a post since we are caught in other duties.
I am fully aware of your good point in the other thread, but replying requires technical details that I cannot give myself at the moment. I am a Dev, not a programmer, some of my duties are to write up designs, weight-up mechanism choices regarding of balance, overal situtation, feedback, experience, check, text if they are properly implemented to match the original goals. I do not take care of the exact code implementation, and you honestly don't want me to tamper with the programming part because this is not what I was hired to do. However, I will poke around to see if I can get you the answer you deserve.
Awesome. There are other concerns too of course but I think the important ones have already been voiced. The stacked guns should for all practical intents and purposes function the same as unstacked guns. I'm not even sure how I feel about the case of the mega missile versus smartbombs/defenders but this has at least been confirmed as an intentional design change and has been accompanied by balance tweaks. In the case of turrets, we need to be concerned not only with maintaining the same damage per second but also damage per volley, range of possible damage values per hit per gun and standard distribution of damage values per hit per gun over the course of a fight. If tracking for all guns is rolled once, for example, that means instead of missing with 7 guns out of 8 on a frigate, I'd have a 1/8 chance of doing full massive damage and a 7/8 chance of missing entirely. But I explained this in the post I linked already.
I was also thinking, what happens to the drawbacks from T2 ammo that are applied to the base ship and not the weapon? The capacitor recharge rate penalty from Rage torpedos, for example, is (as far as I understand) applied separately for each weapon in consecutive order. That makes the final recharge time in seconds t'=t*(1.05^n) where n is the number of launchers loaded with the ammo. So for 8 launchers, it'd be 1.477 times the base recharge time (a 47.7% increase), making the cap/second generated equal to 1/1.477=0.677 of what it was before loading the ammo. Again, don't take my word on that as I can't use t2 missiles to directly test it but that's beside the point. When stacked, the same penalty needs to be applied as when unstacked. Things to check for are that it's not applying only a single 5% penalty or that it's simply adding the penalties together (in this example resulting in a 40% instead of 47.7% increase in capacitor recharge time in seconds).
Once the feature is released, I'm sure people will run enough manual tests to determine if these conditions have all been satisfied and will quickly notice any disparities. |
Dmian
Gallente Gallenterrorisme
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 17:45:00 -
[79]
Originally by: CCP Ytterbium Yes you can if all limitations listed in the Blog are respected (no ammo, same exact type, same state). Just hold shift then drag and drop the modules and here you go. You cannot clear all groups with one button, just right-click each and select "Clear group" instead. Come on, it is only a few extra more clicks .
Just tried it on Sisi, works great! \/ Great work! ----
Eve Alpha - The font of Eve - Get it here |
Gawain Hill
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 18:29:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Jason Edwards
Originally by: Gawain Hill so now instead of having just one or two crystals needing reloading each and every gun will try to load the same crystal every single time you try to change crystals? and then all need reloading for each gun in the group? how is this a good thing?
or does fixing the amarr ammo changing get included in this little idea too?
Nobody says you have to use grouping.
Also afaik it is said that the damage is shared equally. So if you start off with all fresh crystals from day one. In group. It shouldnt be an issue; they ought to burn out at the same time.
the problem is changing crystals once they have been loaded in once and taken out they count as a unique item so all the guns try to load the same crystal at the same time so you have to take a VERY long time between changing crystals or refresh them repeatedly.
so this going to be fixed for the patch or left? |
|
Octavio Santillian
Einherjar Rising
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:13:00 -
[81]
Though I realize this does nothing on the performance side, I would like to see the proposed system implemented with a few additional UI options: namely the ęFire AllĘ button and the ęChange AllĘ option being added. The system CCP is proposing is fine, but frankly, there are lots of situations where players will not or cannot group weapons. In those cases there will be no performance gains anyway, but there is no reason why there cannot be an enhanced UI experience for these situations.
A ęFire allĘ button--that can be mapped--would simply be the equivalent of pressing fire on all weapons nearly simultaneously, but from a single UI button or hotkey. This will allow one to fire various guns and launchers without their having to be identical or loaded with identical ammo. It will also not fire turrets at destroyed targets. Moreover, you get added functionality while still being able to see individual heat readouts, etc.
The ęChange AllĘ will be slightly more trickery to implement, but it should not be a real problem. When you right click on a turret or launcher you can choose to ęChange AllĘ and then choose the new ammo type. This will change the ammo in every turret or launcher, respectively, to the chosen type. Even if you had a mixed load (e.g. Phased Plasma in 2 guns, and Fusion in 3 guns), once you used the ęChange AllĘ option to swap to another ammo type, lets say Barrage, all turrets on the ship would change to Barrage. If you had two types of turrets (e.g. hybrids and lasers or alternatively Artillery and Autocanons), only turrets of the same type would reload, but it would not be necessary that all guns be of the same tier (e.g. you could change the ammo in 425mm and 220mm autocannos at the same time).
Again, I realize that this would not enhance performance, but it will give players more options, and it is a bit more fair to pilots who fit split weapons systems and/or mixed tiers.
|
Feriluce
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:39:00 -
[82]
Quote: However not everybody seems to agree with that since I was told to ōoptimizeö something else and never touch a syringe again (I am a misunderstood genius). So instead I was assigned to take care of weapon management and grouping, which was enough work to keep me away from medical tools for a while.
I nearly fell off my chair lol'ing
|
Mhtsos
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 07:54:00 -
[83]
Overall kudos, I'm sure lots of ppl will find it very useful, and if it reduces lag that much the better. When I read the title of the dev blog though what I imagined was a little more flexible. I know the feature is mostly desinged by now so I'll just throw a couple of ideas for "Grouping v2" for the devs to keep in the back of their heads.
- Group ammo-free modules freely along with weapon groups. That way I can have a target painter fire along with the missiles, or a web along with my blaster group. I'm not sure if this is something that can fit into the whole "one transaction per group" philosophy, but it will be useful even if it's client-side.
- I'm a drone user and I frequently want to target every turret I have on a different targeted ship. Situations where this also is useful are web groups or ECM groups. So a right-click Spread fire option on the group can automate that.
- Visually one big missile IS ugly, see if you can implement "robotecking" (that is all the missiles launching at different directions and then converging on the target. That takes care of the defender problem too, but I'm not sure how the server feels about it, having to "run" 8 missiles instead of one group.
|
Voxis
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:49:00 -
[84]
Awesome feature, actually. YAY. |
Nyphur
Pillowsoft
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:01:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Mhtsos Visually one big missile IS ugly, see if you can implement "robotecking" (that is all the missiles launching at different directions and then converging on the target. That takes care of the defender problem too, but I'm not sure how the server feels about it, having to "run" 8 missiles instead of one group.[/list]
That can be done client-side, surely. Even if missiles are just one mega missile, visually they could be seen launching from multiple tubes, quickly converging into a cluster and heading toward the target. |
Hesod Adee
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:07:00 -
[86]
Edited by: Hesod Adee on 26/10/2008 02:10:59 Sounds good so far, except:
Quote: If the smartbomb does more damage than the individual missile hitpoints, the whole stack is destroyed, otherwise nothing happens.
What happens if the missile is hit by two separate smartbombs, each doing more than 50% of the missiles hp ?
Originally by: Nyphur It's been mentioned that the number of server calculations are being reduced by stacking guns and that the new supergun will be "equivalent" to the eight guns but it's very possible that something's been overlooked and the guns will not be equivalent.
Testing should find these overlooked things. |
Kampfkrampf
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 09:22:00 -
[87]
hm, when do you want to put it online?
WANT IT NOW lol |
sakana
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 09:30:00 -
[88]
sounds good, though i'd like it if you could make "virtual groups", where the guns would all be stacked into a group, but remain in the f1-f8 slots visually, and you have a choice to either activate them all with one shortcut, or do f1-f8 so you can fire one at a time or each on different targets etc.
|
Saffin
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 11:58:00 -
[89]
No advantage to users really, but are you planning to implement the same type of thing for drones. For the lag reason rather than usability increase.
Although im sure there is much more involved in doing drones than guns.
Saf |
SeerinDarkness
Minmatar An Tir Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 12:27:00 -
[90]
weapon grouping was originally nixed in beta and it was stated that it would Not be a added feature in order to promote people playing the game,and not macroing it, which with weapon grouping just got about 1000% easier. so i do not understand its addition now. and when is ccp going to nix the macroing function keyboard's that are in violation of the no macro clause, which are a source of the Lag in fleet fights from all these guys stabbing 1 button to activate 6-8 modules all at the same microsecond Game design orignaly was to prevent this, not implement it. seems like total 180 on the eve community by the implementation of this change. SeerinDarkness
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |