Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.11.26 19:37:00 -
[1]
I just really want to hear this. Any links to such would be appreciated. Any blue posts I would love more.
If I have to explain what the local issue is to a dev, then they really only look at F&I to move posts from general there. -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
mazzilliu
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 10:33:00 -
[2]
local is one part of a wider issue involving intel resources in general. CCP would not be willing to make a significant change to local(for example, introducing a local delay) without making sure it's balanced in their opinion with all intel resources in general. IIRC the issue came up in the past(requesting a local delay, or some sort of way to prevent things like automated local alerts), and CCP replied that they wanted to do an overhaul of intel tools in general instead of just making a change to local in 0.0.
still it's kind of a nagging issue to see so many invincible macroers in 0.0 so it's worth bringing up to CCP again.
|
RedSplat
54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 14:06:00 -
[3]
I doubt CCP will ever 'fix' local in 0.0 in such a manner than the players perceived as victims (Ratters, Plexers, Miners and Macro users) will ever have less of an advantage than they currently do.
This game went pro carebear the moment CCP realized that it made them more $ and the current paradigm isn't going to change.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
mazzilliu
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 16:44:00 -
[4]
the problem is that whatever intel tools they end up giving players, the bots and hacks will always give people an edge. personally i cant think of any intel tools design that will reward skilled and alert players while not allowing bots to essentially be invincible and not giving a skilled attacker essentially free reign to kill everybody.
the way wormholes work with local is awesome(although i think the mashing the scanner is annoying), i wish they made 0.0 like that, but ccp is afraid to rock the boat.
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.11.28 21:32:00 -
[5]
The argument has been hashed to death, I just specifically couldn't find any developer posts. -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
RedSplat
54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 02:43:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha The argument has been hashed to death, I just specifically couldn't find any developer posts.
I don't personally know of any dev posts exhaustively detailing the CCP vision for local and justifying its current state.
You could try and track down some 2~ year old recordings of CCP Zulupark (and another 2 devs i forget) open discussions on balance issues following his superb 'whats wrong with the game' (i paraphrase) thread. Local being an omniscient intel tool that ruins attempts at stealthy gameplay was touched upon there.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
RedSplat
54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 02:51:00 -
[7]
Originally by: mazzilliu
the way wormholes work with local is awesome(although i think the mashing the scanner is annoying), i wish they made 0.0 like that, but ccp is afraid to rock the boat.
Hey, if they replaced the D scanner with a real time 'radar' system that did the equivalent of hit D scanner every 5 seconds that might work; or every 10 seconds if using more than half of the currently available 14 AU, part of the current issue in Wh's is people doing a site can align and get into warp before a hunter has dropped out of warp.
If they want to get all fancy there is even the possibility of tying 'D scanner/radar' hits to sensor strength/sig radius of ships so .
I may also become Queen of England.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 04:59:00 -
[8]
No local is just a boost to blobbing. -Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 05:24:00 -
[9]
Thanks for the dev pointer, helped immensely.
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=905941
Quote:
Local as an info tool: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown. We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least.
-More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 08:29:00 -
[10]
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: mazzilliu
the way wormholes work with local is awesome(although i think the mashing the scanner is annoying), i wish they made 0.0 like that, but ccp is afraid to rock the boat.
Hey, if they replaced the D scanner with a real time 'radar' system that did the equivalent of hit D scanner every 5 seconds that might work; or every 10 seconds if using more than half of the currently available 14 AU, part of the current issue in Wh's is people doing a site can align and get into warp before a hunter has dropped out of warp.
If they want to get all fancy there is even the possibility of tying 'D scanner/radar' hits to sensor strength/sig radius of ships so .
I may also become Queen of England.
There is only a "tiny" problem. 50.000 D scanner querying the server every 2 seconds.
If you recall a couple years ago a cooldown period was introduced for the D scanner because the number of queries from people mashing it constantly was giving the server troubles.
Make it a system that run constantly like your suggested radar and server usage will spike horrendously.
|
|
Antihrist Pripravnik
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 11:50:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 29/11/2010 11:54:27
Originally by: mazzilliu still it's kind of a nagging issue to see so many invincible macroers in 0.0 so it's worth bringing up to CCP again.
Hmm... correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't delayed local be perfect for macroers? I mean, if you're using a macro, you'll hide yourself deep into 0.0 territory in a dead-end, rarely visited system and fire it up. Hunters that want to get you would not even know if you are in local until they scan the system.
Right now, with local in place, you can travel through a fair amount of systems and check the local to see if anyone is there. You can even scout the targeted area and gather intel on who's in which system during a certain part of the day making a list of players using macros easier to create. Macroers tend to work in low populated areas of space, so in many systems you, as a hunter will be alone. If you're alone in the system, you'll just quickly skip it and proceed to another system looking for targets. However, if we take local out of the picture, gathering intel about potential players that are using macro software to rat will be much harder, boring and time consuming than it is now. In other words, it will discourage hunters.
Macro software will just evolve and adapt to the situation. Assuming that the macro software uses local as an intel tool in low populated areas (which is the main argument for your claim), you must realize that, from a programming point of view, there's no difference between gathering intel from local or from any other source. Take the directional scanner for example. If the directional scanner, modified or in current form, would be the new intel gathering tool, then not only that you are effectively hiding macroers in low populated areas (like I described earlier), but you are making them even more invincible than they are now. A software that makes d-scanner refresh requests in the minimum time intervals allowed by the game mechanics will always be more effective than a human. In addition, there's the server load problem (or CPU per user). Any active intel gathering tool that sends a request to the server to get the information (unlike "watching" local which is passive) will increase server resource consumption per user. Naturally, macro users will then make even bigger problems because their time effective automated software will consume much higher amounts of resources than the regular ineffective human.
In the end, just let me say (I'm sorry in advance for this, but it must be said), justifying requests to change fundamental game mechanics (good or bad) that we all used for years by mentioning defense from illegal macro users is more or less pathetic. Not a single game mechanic that even a single legitimate paying customer uses in his every day gaming is worth changing by justifying it with "anti-macro" fight. Legitimate users should not ever "take one for the team" when it comes to fighting against macroers. If a game mechanic is bad, or could be make better, the only valid arguments must include legitimate players only.
Anti out o/
|
RedSplat
54th Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 12:58:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
There is only a "tiny" problem. 50.000 D scanner querying the server every 2 seconds.
Thats not what is said now is it?
Originally by: Venkul Mul
If you recall a couple years ago a cooldown period was introduced for the D scanner because the number of queries from people mashing it constantly was giving the server troubles.
Make it a system that run constantly like your suggested radar and server usage will spike horrendously.
It was not a couple of years ago, it was far more recent that an actual cooldown was added.
People only use the D scanner frequently in 0.0 and W space
Having it only auto-on in 0.0 and WH's and manual as it is now in Empire (or in other words, Empire will be EXACTLY as it is now) would not dramatically increase server load if an appropriate time interval between query's was chosen- people are used to having a foolproof (and idiot proof) warning that someone else is near them, an automatic D scan of ~20 seconds between activations would still give people ample time to react to threats.
Adding further safeguards whereby systems with more than 300 people in them had D scan implemented as a manual tool would further help matters.
In addition, the server load generated by the D scanner before the cooldown was a consequence of macro's making requests several times a second.
Lastly, having a sov upgrade that gave you Empire like local channels (as they are now) that made the D scan manual would be a good step- it would give Alliances a greater degree of safety in exchange for not having the much more lucrative ISK generating sov upgrades in that system.
You seem to be misconstruing the facts here a little.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 20:35:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 29/11/2010 20:36:44
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: Venkul Mul
There is only a "tiny" problem. 50.000 D scanner querying the server every 2 seconds.
Thats not what is said now is it?
I am perfectly aware you were pushing for your "hunter advantage" proposing the 5 or even 10 seconds timer and half range. Currently it is 1.3 seconds unless I have missed a change and it was 2 seconds when it was nerfed. 5 second for 7 AU is a long timer.
Originally by: RedSplat
Originally by: Venkul Mul
If you recall a couple years ago a cooldown period was introduced for the D scanner because the number of queries from people mashing it constantly was giving the server troubles.
Make it a system that run constantly like your suggested radar and server usage will spike horrendously.
It was not a couple of years ago, it was far more recent that an actual cooldown was added.
People only use the D scanner frequently in 0.0 and W space
Having it only auto-on in 0.0 and WH's and manual as it is now in Empire (or in other words, Empire will be EXACTLY as it is now) would not dramatically increase server load if an appropriate time interval between query's was chosen- people are used to having a foolproof (and idiot proof) warning that someone else is near them, an automatic D scan of ~20 seconds between activations would still give people ample time to react to threats.
Adding further safeguards whereby systems with more than 300 people in them had D scan implemented as a manual tool would further help matters.
In addition, the server load generated by the D scanner before the cooldown was a consequence of macro's making requests several times a second.
Lastly, having a sov upgrade that gave you Empire like local channels (as they are now) that made the D scan manual would be a good step- it would give Alliances a greater degree of safety in exchange for not having the much more lucrative ISK generating sov upgrades in that system.
You seem to be misconstruing the facts here a little.
2 second timer was implemented Apocrypha 1.5, released 20 August 2009, i.e. 14 months ago. It fall decently within the "couple of years" mark.
No mention of "0.0 only" change in your previous post and honestly I doubt a automated in 0.0/not automated outside of 0.0 systems will work. At most it would be a activate/deactivate D scanner option and everyone will keep it activated (you know, carebears use it to check for ninja looter in theirs missions, low sec people to find probes and so on).
Quote: an automatic D scan of ~20 seconds between activations would still give people ample time to react to threats.
20 seconds now? Make it 24 hours. Maybe you should read a bit on how fast probes can find a ship. Probably you know that perfectly and that is the reason why you want to push the timer up.
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 22:09:00 -
[14]
If you want it implemented as an automatic measure in 0.0 only, just tie it to the sov structure/upgrades stuff? What did we get that TCU/SBU/whatever crap for else? If you're fine with 25 second sweep, okay, Lvl 1 upgrade will do. If you want a 5 second one, sure, get Lvl 5 and pay the cost (Hell, yeah, sure some muppet will now complain 5 seconds are waaaaay to long and call the Waaambulance. It's an example of how it could work, ffs). That way you don't hand the advantage of that "automated" scan/radar/whatever on a platter to every macro and put some risk vs. reward ratio into the equation by charging more ISK for more effective scans in the system.
And before anyone now claims that will lag out all of nullsec to kingdom come... got any facts to prove that?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 00:05:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Dlardrageth If you want it implemented as an automatic measure in 0.0 only, just tie it to the sov structure/upgrades stuff? What did we get that TCU/SBU/whatever crap for else? If you're fine with 25 second sweep, okay, Lvl 1 upgrade will do. If you want a 5 second one, sure, get Lvl 5 and pay the cost (Hell, yeah, sure some muppet will now complain 5 seconds are waaaaay to long and call the Waaambulance. It's an example of how it could work, ffs). That way you don't hand the advantage of that "automated" scan/radar/whatever on a platter to every macro and put some risk vs. reward ratio into the equation by charging more ISK for more effective scans in the system.
And before anyone now claims that will lag out all of nullsec to kingdom come... got any facts to prove that?
1 structure doing it for a whole system? No
Every ship running an automated scan? Yes. It is the reason why CCP put a cooldown period for the directional scanner.
|
Pesets
The Hunt Club
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 08:20:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Pesets on 01/12/2010 08:21:30 Technically, warping between any two celestials still takes 20-30 seconds on average due to acceleration/deceleration, so it's not like the attacker is on top of you the moment he gets a warpable. I would agree that 20 seconds is too long, since you won't be looking at it 100% of the time and you still need to align to get the hell out of dodge, but five seconds wouldn't be so bad in most cases. Something will have to be done with cloaky warpers though, or stealth bombers and combat recons will be all we'll ever see (or won't see).
As far as server performance goes, i think a 360 scan might be less taxing on the server than the actual directional, and as such could be performed more often. Also, autorepeat and manual scanning don't have to share the timer (could be like, it will autorepeat every five seconds, but you can manually force it to scan more often).
|
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 12:52:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Dlardrageth If you want it implemented as an automatic measure in 0.0 only, just tie it to the sov structure/upgrades stuff? What did we get that TCU/SBU/whatever crap for else? If you're fine with 25 second sweep, okay, Lvl 1 upgrade will do. If you want a 5 second one, sure, get Lvl 5 and pay the cost (Hell, yeah, sure some muppet will now complain 5 seconds are waaaaay to long and call the Waaambulance. It's an example of how it could work, ffs). That way you don't hand the advantage of that "automated" scan/radar/whatever on a platter to every macro and put some risk vs. reward ratio into the equation by charging more ISK for more effective scans in the system.
And before anyone now claims that will lag out all of nullsec to kingdom come... got any facts to prove that?
1 structure doing it for a whole system? No
Every ship running an automated scan? Yes. It is the reason why CCP put a cooldown period for the directional scanner.
Nah, you got me wrong there, let me rephrase. The installed "Scanner Upgrade Thingy" on the I-Hub in a given 0.0 system would determine if and how efficient the automated scan works. Thus in unclaimed/unupgraded systems you could basically have similar mechanics to now (Or even no scanning? But nvm, that's another can of worms...). In upgraded systems any ship in that system would get the benefit of the automated scan.
So basically you would have the option for "every ship running an automated scan" (in the system)... if you/sov holder are willing to pay for it. And invest some effort in upgrading the system. So it is not the 1 structure doing the scan (not like the old POS' system scanning array), it is just enabling the ships to do it. Also by somewhat limiting the spread of that mechanism it might lighten a bit the potential server load globally.
Smart thing to do would ofc be to implement it in a way that the pilot/player would actually have to watch this automated scanner as well as now the directional one. Like mentioned before, I really don't want it to become a gift to your neighborhood macro to make his life easier. Which a universal autoscan function might well be.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.01 12:59:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 01/12/2010 13:06:54
Originally by: Pesets Edited by: Pesets on 01/12/2010 08:21:30 Technically, warping between any two celestials still takes 20-30 seconds on average due to acceleration/deceleration, so it's not like the attacker is on top of you the moment he gets a warpable. I would agree that 20 seconds is too long, since you won't be looking at it 100% of the time and you still need to align to get the hell out of dodge, but five seconds wouldn't be so bad in most cases. Something will have to be done with cloaky warpers though, or stealth bombers and combat recons will be all we'll ever see (or won't see).
As far as server performance goes, i think a 360 scan might be less taxing on the server than the actual directional, and as such could be performed more often. Also, autorepeat and manual scanning don't have to share the timer (could be like, it will autorepeat every five seconds, but you can manually force it to scan more often).
1) The first problem is that you can have the probes in range of your in board scanner for less than 5 seconds and the ship warping to you will be on your on board scanner only for the last part of his warp (or even for no part of it if it is use a Cov Op cloak).
So you need a scanner cycle equal or shorter than the shortest possible cycle for the probes or you would routinely fail to detect them even checking the scanner at every cycle.
2) With autorepeat and manual scanning using different cycles you are helping the macros. An automated third party program has no trouble hitting the scan button at the highest frequency while a player will be usually slower.
Originally by: Dlardrageth
Nah, you got me wrong there, let me rephrase.
And so we hit again the problem of running hundred or thousand of queries to the server.
Less than if it was possible to do this in every system, but probably enough to create problems as soon as a decent number of ships is in a upgraded system.
|
Pesets
The Hunt Club
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 03:23:00 -
[19]
Well, if the only reason to have autorepeat timer under five seconds is to see the probes that are visible for under five seconds... it would seem that a more logical solution would be to send a specific alert to a player once his ship has been probed out. Not a siren and flashy red screen, but a text notification and maybe an ambient sound (like the one you hear when you activate the probes themselves).
Autorepeat directional would still be useful when belt ratting, but it wouldn't have to cycle under five seconds. As for cloaky warpers, again, something special would have to be done about them. Maybe make them still show up on directional as "unidentified signature", maybe only detectable from like 4au rather than 14. They would still "warp cloaked" as in not having to recloak after landing on grid.
|
Corina Jarr
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 03:47:00 -
[20]
Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there some sort of IU reason for local? I thought I read it somewhere, about CONCORD setting up inter-system communication and all ships having transponders or something.
I may be wrong. Its been a while since I read EvE fiction.
|
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 07:45:00 -
[21]
There is a case for it being necessary for the cloning techniques to work. There are also examples of it not being necessary, as well as the fact that you can work around it. IE, the network is upgraded/new Jove tech is unveiled, and you only need to be in contact with the regional server, or none at all. -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 12:57:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Pesets As for cloaky warpers, again, something special would have to be done about them. Maybe make them still show up on directional as "unidentified signature", maybe only detectable from like 4au rather than 14. They would still "warp cloaked" as in not having to recloak after landing on grid.
I have nothing against "cloaky warpers", they are doing their function, so there is no need to change anything there.
But an alert player has the "right" to have a chance of noticing the probes.
|
Amda Tori
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 04:23:00 -
[23]
The only benefit from "removing Local" would get the mission runners from high sech in NPC corp. I really don't want for some players to benefit from that over others. Probes you say ? Some anomalies can be found with the on board scanner, no need for probes. So, what i'm reading here it's QQ from the CovOps afkers.
Quote: - WAAAAAAH! WAAAAAH!! CCP, EVERY TIME I ENTER A SYSTEM THEY GO IN THEIR POS AND I CANNOT HOT DROP THEM!!! PLEASE FIX THIS, REMOVE LOCAL CHAT SO THEY CANNOT SEE MEE! WAAAH! WAAAAH!!!
Removing local it's an extra weapon for CovOps cyno. Why should they get that extreme advantage ?! I was talking about 0.0, not low sec or high sec.
|
Feyleaf
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 07:45:00 -
[24]
Remove local from -0.5 and lower imo.. maybe have a delay that scaled with true-sec.
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari Technomage Trilogy Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 19:06:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Amda Tori The only benefit from "removing Local" would get the mission runners from high sech in NPC corp. I really don't want for some players to benefit from that over others. Probes you say ? Some anomalies can be found with the on board scanner, no need for probes. So, what i'm reading here it's QQ from the CovOps afkers.
Quote: - WAAAAAAH! WAAAAAH!! CCP, EVERY TIME I ENTER A SYSTEM THEY GO IN THEIR POS AND I CANNOT HOT DROP THEM!!! PLEASE FIX THIS, REMOVE LOCAL CHAT SO THEY CANNOT SEE MEE! WAAAH! WAAAAH!!!
Removing local it's an extra weapon for CovOps cyno. Why should they get that extreme advantage ?! I was talking about 0.0, not low sec or high sec.
You deserve to be hot dropped for that horribly structured post. -More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
Black Dranzer
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 21:01:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Black Dranzer on 03/12/2010 21:01:45
Originally by: Amda Tori So, what i'm reading here it's QQ from the CovOps afkers.
Quote: - WAAAAAAH! WAAAAAH!! CCP, EVERY TIME I ENTER A SYSTEM THEY GO IN THEIR POS AND I CANNOT HOT DROP THEM!!! PLEASE FIX THIS, REMOVE LOCAL CHAT SO THEY CANNOT SEE MEE! WAAAH! WAAAAH!!!
Wait.. so the cloakers are complaining about the AFK cloaker effect now? While being AFK? But they're still upset that people are..
What the **** am I reading
|24 Hour Plex|Mining Makeover| |
Dlardrageth
ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.08 13:20:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Venkul Mul Edited by: Venkul Mul on 01/12/2010 13:06:54 [...] And so we hit again the problem of running hundred or thousand of queries to the server.
Less than if it was possible to do this in every system, but probably enough to create problems as soon as a decent number of ships is in a upgraded system.
Hm, you mean like in those big "fleet battles" that supposedly got fixed so they're "lag-free"(TM) now? Tbh, in comparison the lag increase by automated scans in a couple dozen system should be manageable IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |