| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Andrea Griffin
   |
Posted - 2010.04.19 21:35:00 -
[211]
 Originally by: Camios
make it possible to light a cyno inside a pos forcefield if the system sov is contested.
So my alt alliance can contest the system and I can cyno right into total, complete safety? Sweet! 
|
Gamer4liff
Caldari
Metalworks
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 00:21:00 -
[212]
Edited by: Gamer4liff on 20/04/2010 00:21:37
Somebody give whoever made the 5,900,000,000 AU BM a medal.
-----------
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Deal with it.
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar
Capital Construction Research
Pioneer Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 01:44:00 -
[213]
"The furthest bookmark is 5,900,000,000 AU (95,000 light years) from its sun. This is roughly the same distance as the diameter of the milky way"
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun
No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
Hack Harrison
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 02:02:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Marchocias
Originally by: Hack Harrison
...
No game sends graphics over the internet (which is what you are saying). They send instructions on what to display.
Checkout OnLive. Astonishingly they're doing exactly this.
Just looked at the site - got a nice fancy video without anything explained - it basically looks like CITRIX for gamers - not a good option for people in Australia who have to pay for bandwidth. But my statement still stands as best as I can tell - they run the client (graphics still not being sent from the server) and then send the rendered output to you.
|
Valkerias
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 02:05:00 -
[215]
Here's just a wild idea. Have the boundaries, but keep the deep safes. Create legitimate means of creating "deep safes" and instead of destroying the deep safes or the ships, set the capacitor recharge rate to anything in a "deep safe" outside the bubble boundary of the system to 0 except for ships that can NOT be docked, like super capitals, titans, rorquals, and even throw in the Orca for good measure.
Smaller ships, like interceptors, bombers, etc. may be able to warp IN to a "deep safe" but may find themselves not being able to warp out again because they've exceeded the maximum distance that they can gain power from the sun and they don't have on board reactors strong enough to make up the difference. In addition, these "deep safes" should be 0.0 regardless of what system they're made in, like wormhole space. It could open all sorts of possibilities. Rare ice belts (lightning ice anyone) with asteroids the size of small moons, "fueling stations" where players can get their cap recharged for a price, rare exploration sites like Jovians or something really bizarre. pirate staging areas, (those belt rats have to warp into the belts from somewhere, oort clouds (as someone mentioned earlier), nebula, being able to WARP from one system to another without using gates... the list goes on! CCP, you should have really given this more thought.
As for the farthest BM... 5.9 BILLION AU! That's INSANE! Some pilot must have worked REAL hard to get that one.
|
Kavin Alavandar
Extropy Dianoetics
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 07:00:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Valkerias
As for the farthest BM... 5.9 BILLION AU! That's INSANE! Some pilot must have worked REAL hard to get that one.
I don't even understand how it's possible. It would take longer to warp that distance than EVE has been online.
My understanding is that even an interceptor totally dedicated to warp speed mods can only get up to 13 AU/s. Even at 13 AU/s, that's over 14 years of warping.
Hell, even at 20 AU/s, if it were possible, that's still over 9 years.
_______________________________________________
'The illiterate of this century are not those who cannot read and write; but those who cannot learn, unlearn, and relearn.' |
Carniflex
StarHunt
Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 11:31:00 -
[217]
What about deep safespots as the only working solution when bridging into hostile system under heavy lag (caused by the current sov system where everyone and his granny had to pile into one system to have fighting chanse) ?
You assume the lag will go away ? Or that if someone has crammed 300 guys into system it is supposed to be turkey shoot while other guys are scratching their balls and loading the grid ? What about heavy lag AND bombers ? You can currently jump in, load grid and GTFO before bombers land in deep safe, if you are 20 au from celestial then bombers will be landing before you load the grid even if there is only moderate lag.
I can ofc symphatezise with the stress of having too big system for your tastes, but you guys are breaking my sandbox here.
I am not pleased with your solution. You should be able to do better.
|
James Razor
Amarr
The Executives
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 11:39:00 -
[218]
Well, CCP does not care about the lag it seems or that we can not fight any longer if the Deep Safes are gone because we can not get into a system.
If we stop fighting, CCP has less work cleaning up the mess they did.
(Yes, i am bitter and ironical. But look what CCP does and tell me i dont have good reasons for that.)
|
Marchocias
Silent Ninja's
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 12:56:00 -
[219]
Originally by: Hack Harrison
Originally by: Marchocias
Originally by: Hack Harrison
...
No game sends graphics over the internet (which is what you are saying). They send instructions on what to display.
Checkout OnLive. Astonishingly they're doing exactly this.
Just looked at the site - got a nice fancy video without anything explained - it basically looks like CITRIX for gamers - not a good option for people in Australia who have to pay for bandwidth. But my statement still stands as best as I can tell - they run the client (graphics still not being sent from the server) and then send the rendered output to you.
Yeah... its a lot of hype at the moment. Cool idea though... except if the video compression is too agressive then I imagine the mpeg artifacts might be a bit unpleasant to play with.
----
I belong to Silent Ninja (Hopefully that should cover it). |
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 13:17:00 -
[220]
Originally by: chadwill
Originally by: Zenst
Oh deep safespots you serve us so well,
At times of lag when servers go towards hell.
I call it a mechanic you call it a bug,
The forums a panic from dominions drink jug.
So look at the problem and not at the cure,
You idea is iratic and offtrack I'll assure.
The deep-safe patch prayer:
Your idea, which farts in space,
flawed be thy name;
thy deepsafe gone;
thy will be done;
in lag as it is in space.
Give us this day our daily sanity,
as we forgive them that patch against us.
And lead us not into lag;
But deliver us from lag.
For thine is the system,
the stability, and the soverenty,
for ever and never.
Aye CCP
+1 internets for you my good sir
clap clap
Thank you Sir, glad it was appreceated
|
|
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 14:23:00 -
[221]
Quote:
Well, CCP does not care about the lag it seems or that we can not fight any longer if the Deep Safes are gone because we can not get into a system.
If we stop fighting, CCP has less work cleaning up the mess they did.
It's apparent that the devs trying to fix the lag issues are on another and independent team than the ones working on the next expansion "other features" and this is the indeed untimely result.
But there's an obvious question that I can ask to the players and it's as nasty as asking CCP why they don't fix lag before DSS:
"Once fixed the lag and 300 v 300 becomes viable again, deny with a straight face that the following escalation will happen: FCs strong with the knowledge that 300 v 300 works, will just bring in 500 v 500 and then 1000 v 1000, till the node crashes".
Basically this is a problem with game design. No DSS removal, no lag fixing will prevent the blobs to always escalate up to the next notch till the game chokes again.
-
Auditing & consulting
When looking for investors, please read
http://tinyurl.com/n5ys4h + http://tinyurl.com/lrg4oz
|
Alex Link
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 16:14:00 -
[222]
how about the other defect that allows people to blow up things inside pos shields, including pos modules, while the shield is active?
will that defect be fixed too?
will the ******ed GM's reimburse the ship losses caused by this?
|
Chaldia Ishta
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 17:52:00 -
[223]
Ok, so the only thing that is changing is that all old stuff and bookmarks are being moved to (furthest object+20 AU) from the Sun of each system. As being a rather new player compared to the ones who are affected by this I will not comment if this is good or bad. However I do agree with what "I think" the Dev's are trying to accomplish (trying to read their minds and such).
Noting what the messages tell me in game, a warp drive has to be locked onto a point to warp to it and can't just warp off in any direction. This point being objects, fields, ships, etc., and just bookmarked locations. This makes knowing where your going Valid. The Ships use water-like physics to move when not in warp, ie. thrusters turn off, your ship stops instead of continuing forever. Using these we build a model that helps us explain their new system.
Making size of systems anchor-able locations based on the strength of a Star which can be measured by the furthest object from it, which is due to some kind of field or something emanating from the star. This would give a physical reason for:
1. Anchor-ables can only be anchored (furthest object+20) AU from the star because they rely on the field to remain in place.
This keeps the sov. system stuff in a range that can be scanned within reason and still leaves a good range of possible locations to place it.
2. Bookmarks are limited to(furthest object+200 or more) AU from the Star because of the same field.
Anything past that can't be bookmarked because the field is to weak to create points. This also wouldn't stop people from being able to fly outside of that range, it just makes it harder. Also, I wouldn't know a actual good distance for this so all you that play out there can probably give a reasonable number here.
3. This field is what stops our ships in space and is why things are able to be "Anchored" in the first place.
I have not read up on the back story of eve or their explanations of why things work the way they do, so if this has been explained, Ignore it. I would assume our Warp-drives never really turn off and are reacting with the field or something. But it would make sense for all these things that it seems the Dev's are trying to accomplish. I noticed that they haven't stopped us from going out there but they have made it harder. As I read it, if you can get one ship out to DS then you can still get get others there and light your cyno's or anything else you guys need to do to have those large fleet battle. I'm just trying to offer my own thoughts to whats going on.
Now, tell me why I'm wrong cause I know I am (and I know I explained it better in my head that what I typed, read my mind)
|
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.20 19:36:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Chaldia Ishta
<SNIP see above for full user posting>
Making size of systems anchor-able locations based on the strength of a Star which can be measured by the furthest object from it, which is due to some kind of field or something emanating from the star. This would give a physical reason for:
1. Anchor-ables can only be anchored (furthest object+20) AU from the star because they rely on the field to remain in place.
This keeps the sov. system stuff in a range that can be scanned within reason and still leaves a good range of possible locations to place it.
2. Bookmarks are limited to(furthest object+200 or more) AU from the Star because of the same field.
Anything past that can't be bookmarked because the field is to weak to create points. This also wouldn't stop people from being able to fly outside of that range, it just makes it harder. Also, I wouldn't know a actual good distance for this so all you that play out there can probably give a reasonable number here.
3. This field is what stops our ships in space and is why things are able to be "Anchored" in the first place.
I have not read up on the back story of eve or their explanations of why things work the way they do, so if this has been explained, Ignore it. I would assume our Warp-drives never really turn off and are reacting with the field or something. But it would make sense for all these things that it seems the Dev's are trying to accomplish. I noticed that they haven't stopped us from going out there but they have made it harder. As I read it, if you can get one ship out to DS then you can still get get others there and light your cyno's or anything else you guys need to do to have those large fleet battle. I'm just trying to offer my own thoughts to whats going on.
Now, tell me why I'm wrong cause I know I am (and I know I explained it better in my head that what I typed, read my mind)
Well if we take away the role-played idea of some arbitary feild which has no grounding in real life science then points 1-3 you are making are wrong.
Bottom line this change is a complete labotamy of an idea concieved by somebody on some designed drug. Why, well because its a chnage that is not only not needed but actualy extreemly insulting to players because:
1) It ignores the problems the players actualy have.
2) It breaks a work-around to an issue that casues people to lose ships and not get them reinbursed like expense fitted titans that the players dont even see load in system.
3) Nobody has come up with one single valid reason for this change.
4) No player who this effects actual wants this change.
5) It shows a utter contempt for players in that it shows a complete misunderstanding of what problems the players have and as such highlights a out-of-touch sentiment with reality
There are more but thats just of the top of my head. Bottom line this suggestion makes IceSave a viable option for investment today.
Its wrong, so wrong that I can only assume that its the lets spin them something so crazy and insulting and insane, leave them to get angry over it and then withdraw the idea and everybody will think we care without us having to do a thing beyond a crazy dev-blog. Marketing style tactics more suited to politics than a games company.
I mean what next - tall fury creatures that live on a gas-planet -- that does not make sence!
|
YT Forever
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 01:04:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Zenst
Originally by: Chaldia Ishta
<SNIP see above for full user posting>
I mean what next - tall fury creatures that live on a gas-planet -- that does not make sence!
Your right it would not make sence!!!
Gas planets = squid like creatures the fury ones would be on the ice planets ! d'oh
|
Rashmika Clavain
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 11:21:00 -
[226]
Holy crap:
Quote:
The furthest bookmark is 5,900,000,000 AU (95,000 light years) from its sun. This is roughly the same distance as the diameter of the milky way
|
Mehang Zheng
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 12:30:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Jattzia
The blog completely ignores that DEEP SAFE SPOTS ARE THE ONLY CURRENT WORKAROUND TO LAG.
And may I ask - Why should the game be rigged on side of invader?
Dominion did already improve the advantage of invading forces.
I think lag is showing some benefit for defenders. And for your case, CCP has GIVEN you way to limit lag - but for "some" reason you invaders decided intentionally NOT to use it. You should inform CCP to reinforce systems you are planning to attack.
Thus, stop the fraking complaining why your way of averting rules should be okay. Start following rules.
Yours Mehang Zheng
|
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 13:59:00 -
[228]
Originally by: Mehang Zheng
Originally by: Jattzia
The blog completely ignores that DEEP SAFE SPOTS ARE THE ONLY CURRENT WORKAROUND TO LAG.
And may I ask - Why should the game be rigged on side of invader?
Dominion did already improve the advantage of invading forces.
I think lag is showing some benefit for defenders. And for your case, CCP has GIVEN you way to limit lag - but for "some" reason you invaders decided intentionally NOT to use it. You should inform CCP to reinforce systems you are planning to attack.
Thus, stop the fraking complaining why your way of averting rules should be okay. Start following rules.
Yours Mehang Zheng
 GO TROLL ELSEWERE YOU MUPPET YOU DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOUR ON ABOUT
|
Stratio
Minmatar
Mirkur Draug'Tyr
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 14:06:00 -
[229]
Originally by: Hack Harrison
they run the client (graphics still not being sent from the server) and then send the rendered output to you.
Eh? So they do send the graphics from the server.
_____________________
Poreuomai's Spokesman
For Tribe and Honour! |
Urraka
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 14:54:00 -
[230]
Once again CCP GM/Devs prove they don't know a single thing about how stuff actually works in their own game.
Lets delete safe spots altogether, probes? wtf you need probes for .. increase on board scanner to do system wide scan and detect. Hell might as well give ships AIS and ARPA signals and they is no need for any ssafe spots.
Jump in, warp to target! GO GO GO !
|
|
|
Urraka
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 15:00:00 -
[231]
Originally by: Carniflex
What about deep safespots as the only working solution when bridging into hostile system under heavy lag (caused by the current sov system where everyone and his granny had to pile into one system to have fighting chanse) ?
There is no lag! CCP owns the best equipment and XI in the world. buy a new internet connection! buy a better graphic card! hell buy a FO directly to the servers in UK.
|
Kerfira
Audaces Fortuna Iuvat
|
Posted - 2010.04.21 22:41:00 -
[232]
Originally by: Zenst
EDIT ADD: Reason I'm calling you a troll is that you have been in a noob starter corp for 2 years and as such have no experience of 0.0 mechanics from a personal perspective - THIS CHANGE EFFECTS 0.0 hugely. This and you go on about things that dont exist - ego you dont have a clue. this makes you a clueless troll and thus I'm calling you out as one.
Posting in reply to a noob who hasn't discovered that there are 3 (three!) characters on an account!
If you look at MZ's character sheet, you'll see all the indications that this is a non-training alt. No standings at all except 10.0 to the intro agent (as all characters get)...
Quite a few people (me too) doesn't like their forum posting spilling over into the game. As such, we use our alts...
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 02:56:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Zenst on 22/04/2010 02:57:27
Originally by: Kerfira
Originally by: Zenst
EDIT ADD: Reason I'm calling you a troll is that you have been in a noob starter corp for 2 years and as such have no experience of 0.0 mechanics from a personal perspective - THIS CHANGE EFFECTS 0.0 hugely. This and you go on about things that dont exist - ego you dont have a clue. this makes you a clueless troll and thus I'm calling you out as one.
Posting in reply to a noob who hasn't discovered that there are 3 (three!) characters on an account!
If you look at MZ's character sheet, you'll see all the indications that this is a non-training alt. No standings at all except 10.0 to the intro agent (as all characters get)...
Quite a few people (me too) doesn't like their forum posting spilling over into the game. As such, we use our alts...
It still dosn't excuse the fact that he is talking out of the lower orafice instead of the upper orafice; If anything it compunds it. he's still a clueless troll who's hiding behind a alt :p
Seriously though - him saying this offers an advantage to the attacker is bull**** and the fact that there isn;t a mechanic at all that counters the lag - indeed more than 200 on the gate and anybody jumping in is doomed - reinforced node or not. And for what - sorry logs show nothing and yet there aware of the problem. That does not make sence and is insulting to players.
But thank you for pointimng out that he is an alt - still dosn't imply he has done 0.0 alliance fleet warfare at all.
|
Darlon Shae
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 05:15:00 -
[234]
Originally by: Zenst
Well if we take away the role-played idea of some arbitary feild which has no grounding in real life science then points 1-3 you are making are wrong.
Okay, even if the game does not follow Newtonian physics - nor Euclidian - there is still ingame reason.
Solar systems DO have boundary. It is called menopaus where the solar wind is no longer able to keep dust away. Thus, make limit this. Make that weird area something nobody can fly into.
Solar Systems shoudl have boundaries, but we have bunch of pirates using Deep safes as beach heads to invade systems whining when some gamist reason changes. They hate it when they lose some advantage they have.
Like someone said, lag is there. It will never go away. Why? Because nobody who isn't roleplayer wants to play it fair. I wonder why reinforced nodes are not used by Goons or -A-? Because their tactics include metagaming. They do not give a **** - or rather they would take all "stupid roleplayers" from behind because they do limit their own abilites for RP reasons. Insane for such sociopath people.
Removal of Deep Safes is good thing. Since they cannot be created, they are exploit nowadays. They were exploitation of a bug. I am still wondering WHY CCP doesn't use its previosu tactics for such thing - announce it exploit and then ban everyone who still uses it.
And fighting lag? Best way is start asking CCP to reinfoce nodes. And I think CCP should start logging who did crash the node - send warning after first, and second time, and ban for third. You, CCP, have given a proper way to reinforce node. Force those people who DO NOT want to play by rules to use it.
Yours Mehang Zheng
|
Darlon Shae
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 05:23:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Darlon Shae on 22/04/2010 05:26:09
Originally by: Zenst
Edited by: Zenst on 21/04/2010 14:17:19
Originally by: Mehang Zheng
Originally by: Jattzia
The blog completely ignores that DEEP SAFE SPOTS ARE THE ONLY CURRENT WORKAROUND TO LAG.
And may I ask - Why should the game be rigged on side of invader?
Dominion did already improve the advantage of invading forces.
I think lag is showing some benefit for defenders. And for your case, CCP has GIVEN you way to limit lag - but for "some" reason you invaders decided intentionally NOT to use it. You should inform CCP to reinforce systems you are planning to attack.
Thus, stop the fraking complaining why your way of averting rules should be okay. Start following rules.
Yours Mehang Zheng
GO TROLL ELSEWERE YOU MUPPET YOU DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOUR ON ABOUT
EDIT ADD: Reason I'm calling you a troll is that you have been in a noob starter corp for 2 years and as such have no experience of 0.0 mechanics from a personal perspective - THIS CHANGE EFFECTS 0.0 hugely. This and you go on about things that dont exist - ego you dont have a clue. this makes you a clueless troll and thus I'm calling you out as one.
Okay. YOu should stop that. Mehang Zheng is my alt. I used to use Mehang to FOrum posting relating game mechanics because those mails are out of character. Okay. I shoudl not send them to tired, thus I come out of closet. This is no RP mail, and I do not meddle with such thins - I'm a roleplaying character and this is out of game thread. And, would you tell me WHY reinforcing nodes does not work, instead of claiming I am a troll. And no, my main is not in 0.0 sec. He isn't stupid enough to get into mafia wars of 0.0 call "politics".
I think you are a good troll who wants to announce that anyone differing in your opinion is a troll because you do not want to talk of it. Give me reason WHY reinforcing the nodes does not help? Oh, I know. Because if node is reinfroced those who do not abide rules gets MORE people in. See my next post of banning such offenders.
Oh yes, it does change 0.0 sec game. No ****. Why didn't you while of removal of Gallente POS exploit the same. It did change 0.0 sec a lot too. The way to create these Deed Safes has been bug. Would you tell me WHY fruits of that bug should be okay while POS exploit was not? This exploit gives similar advantage allowing enemy fleet to jump into system in area where friendlies cannot reach them. That is a BIG exploit. Or like someone said, the defenders can setup the sovereignity control bunker into such location hostiles cannot reach.
Of course it changes 0.0 sec, because from forum posts, it seesm 0.0 sec relies on exploits of bugs. Nobody plays fair, but metagame is way to go.
And.. to continue on other person - yes.. Honestly, even if my main sues cloak, I think cloak should have duration. Infinite cloak is too powerful. Make cloak use cap little and neutralize cap regen completely when it is online. That would force cov. ops to emerge to regen cap after warping around.
Yours Mehang Zheng
|
Kerfira
Audaces Fortuna Iuvat
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 07:32:00 -
[236]
Edited by: Kerfira on 22/04/2010 07:33:47
Originally by: Zenst
It still dosn't excuse the fact that he is talking out of the lower orafice instead of the upper orafice; If anything it compunds it. he's still a clueless troll who's hiding behind a alt
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean their opinion is not a valid one. Since he is paying the same as you to play, his opinion is EXACTLY as valid as yours!
By saying that he's a troll and talking BS, you're EFFECTIVELY saying that so are you. This follows from his opinion having the same intrinsic value as yours.
Now, you'll probably brand me a troll as well....
I understand completely why CCP is fixing this bug. Simply because different teams work on different things, and it is not always possible to coordinate them. I also suspect there are some untold technical issues that makes CCP think this needs to get fixed asap.
The 'benefit' you're talking about just adds to the lag and system instability at the moment, since it enables battles to take place that otherwise wouldn't. These battles are too big for the server to handle (we all know that), and quite frankly it is better they don't take place at all. This is of cause seen from a server stability point of view and not from the involved alliances.
If you can't get into a system the enemy is attacking, attack one of his systems instead and then take your own system back when he goes to save his...
While the jump-in problem is a serious one, it doesn't warrant letting other bugs not getting fixed.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Chi Quan
Bibkor Enterprises
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 08:19:00 -
[237]
the furthest BM out, does it happen to be the one that is actually in jove space?
can't remember the name of the guy, but a few years back someone tried to go to jove space by using the (now revamped) probe system. iirc it took him a week or so of constant probing ahead & warping to the probe to accomplish this.
----
Ceterum censeo blasters need some tracking love |
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.22 13:58:00 -
[238]
^&^To the posters replying to my posts above (i'm posting this instead of replying to all 3) THANK YOU. Thank you for pointing out in detail your points and also for correcting any misconceptions I had of your stance - most apprecieated and I do acknowledge I was wrong calling you a troll.
I will say though the reinforced nodes are not exactly as robust as advertised due to grid limitations which I'm sure your aware of and the deep-safe cyno was the only way to saftly get people into a system and alas still is under those situations. It is this aspect that grates me due to the way CCP handles lag loss's. Which I believe we ALL agree is unfair. Its also that there doing this change and not made any assurance of how there lag fix's have progressed or indeed any assurances that are solid. Indeed Dominion was supposed to allow better fleet fights - this it does not and was actualy a huge step backwards.
If we had a choice I'm sure we would prefer laggier systems with solid assured logging than any other change they could muster. At least things would be fair. AS for pirates using deep safes - well its not an issue as most will cloak anyhow and you can probe them. As for the limit there imposing its still too short (X-70 springs to mind) for some systems and I suspect it will cause more problems than not. As for imposing some arbitary limit due to some limitation its not the case and hold no model upon real life as otherwise how would anybody get to one solarsystem to another without a star-gate and as such how were the original stargates laid out if that was the case -- given that it as a whole does not make sence.
But i shall respect that some people disagree on some of the details/finer points and accept and appologise if it was percieved that I assumed nobody had a valid point. Albiet I'll disagree with those points.
Either way it is hard not to feel that CCP are not addressing the core issues and spending time on those aspects the players feel they should.
|
Mehang Zheng
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 05:02:00 -
[239]
Originally by: Zenst
^&^To the posters replying to my posts above (i'm posting this instead of replying to all 3) THANK YOU. Thank you for pointing out in detail your points and also for correcting any misconceptions I had of your stance - most apprecieated and I do acknowledge I was wrong calling you a troll.
I will say though the reinforced nodes are not exactly as robust as advertised due to grid limitations which I'm sure your aware of and the deep-safe cyno was the only way to saftly get people into a system and alas still is under those situations. It is this aspect that grates me due to the way CCP handles lag loss's. Which I believe we ALL agree is unfair. Its also that there doing this change and not made any assurance of how there lag fix's have progressed or indeed any assurances that are solid. Indeed Dominion was supposed to allow better fleet fights - this it does not and was actualy a huge step backwards.
Lag is unavoidable - because like many have said, the metagaming tactical issues are used on regular basis on null sec strategies - or do I have got wrong impression how 0.0 sec works. And due this metagaming side, lag is always sought by many if not most 0.0 sec powers. It is powerful tool. And there is no way CCP can avoid that lag - like many have pointed out, because if there is no lag, one side starts using dirty tricks to enlarge the number of items. This forum more proves and disproves the mafia mentality of 0.0 sec - anything goes as long CCP does not ban you and even it is viable option.
For defending side - this upgrade will actaully make game more realistic in strategywise, because your numbers would limit how many systems you can defend. You moan because it makes the strategy different.
CCP could make incoming ships through jump invulnerable until they have loaded the grid like ships who use gates.
Originally by: Zenst
But i shall respect that some people disagree on some of the details/finer points and accept and appologise if it was percieved that I assumed nobody had a valid point. Albiet I'll disagree with those points.
Either way it is hard not to feel that CCP are not addressing the core issues and spending time on those aspects the players feel they should.
There is no real life reference for spaceships having maximum speed in space - the game uses atmospheric flight mechanics for space like so many other "space" games. There is no real life physics example for forcefields. There is no real life examples for containers which are larger inside than outside. Shall I continue? This game has nothing to do with realistic model anyway.
And there is real life boundary for solar system - Astronomers calls it the area outside which solar wind pressure no longer can push the interstellar gas out. Thus, there is IN-GAME reasons for such.
And.. Core issue? Most of characters live in hihg sec - how huge blob battles can be core issue? Just because you are 0.0 sec dweller makes 0.0 sec way more important than anything else? And, no, you arne't low sec dweller.. You yourself are on NPC corp, and your own comments seems to indicate that means you are newbie troll. Did I do something wrong when I applied your own argument against you?
Even as highsec dweller, I would prefer that metagaming would be limited. Make logout not warp back where you were when you logged out - that takes care of login traps. Inside POS forcefield should be exception of this. Make cloaks to have duration to prevent people sitting on system safe.
I am one of those rare players who do assess changes on behalf of game, not on behalf of my own exploitation and gaming power. For example, the drone bandhwith update did hurt me a lot, but I do still think it was necessary and good change. How many of you 0.0 sec dwellers can do such thing? Assess things on neutral perspective instead of childish assessing how much this hindres your own gaming and advantage. Yes. that is childish behavior if you did not know.
MZ
|
Zenst
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.04.23 13:00:00 -
[240]
My main concern with this change is that it now limits attackers to being exposed to the lag jump-in issue more than they were with the deep-safe cyno workaround. This makes it harder without offering anything thats balances it. Lag/logs show nothing ship loss's should not be a tactic/part of 0.0 fleet fights or any fights.
What can be done to make things more balanced/fair:
1) The control units you have to place at the gates - these should be placed on the incomming gate and not as they are in the outgoing gate to the system. This spreads the defence across systems more and due to the spread out affords a fairer form of play instead of concentration across one single system.
2) Jump-in timer - (I already suggested few times - first 3 years ago) Instead of the fixed 30 second timer one shoe fits all approach it should be a minimum of 30 seconds and for every player in the system over say 30 it gets increased 1 second. So If your jumping into a system with 100 people you have a 100 second invulnebility timer.
3) Logging - player would rather have a slightly slower server and better logging than not. A Form of local logs acceptable would be great - PKI, logservers. There are options that can be exlored.
4) Formation fleet warps - ie you have a formation fleet warp option along with fleet warp as per normal but the formation one will warp people as normal but they land instead of were the gang leaders lands but in the same relation to the gang leader that they were when the formation warp was initiated. This would afford people better tactics and also means there will be less client/server interaction involved in repositioning after gang warps as well as negating any potentual desyncs from mad bounces as and when they present. just makes sence.
I'm sure there are more great idea's.
Tacticaly all I can suggest if this change goes ahead is to use a blackop to bridge in a bloackage runner with covert op cloak into the system and get that to deplay large bubbles over all the spots in relation to were you plan to drop your cyno so that when you drop a cyno for people to bridge into a system anybody looking at warping to that cyno and picking of ships in a turkey shoot as well as lag-blocking the grid will initialy land in the bubbles at a safe distance. Also you do the cyno on a grid-line so that some of your fleet will land on a another grid. This is the best tactic I can think of beyond everybody in stealth bombers and recons using blackops.
Either way I agree things need to be fairer and for that changes that reduce blob interaction on one single front are needed, especialy when there initial interactions (ie jump-in/cyno into system) instead of aiding them further.
Though I still feel this change is wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |