| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Lady Go Diveher
   |
Posted - 2011.06.20 20:20:00 -
[1]
Linky link
and Fallout confirms :
CCP Fallout on twitter
You'll need to expand the conversation he has with @webspaceships
trolololollll
I'm so happy I could post threads!
|
Aqriue
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 20:39:00 -
[2]
Do you need help starting a petition to move all level 4s to lowsec? Cause your next forum b**** rant is going be even less targets in lowsec 
|
Angsty Teenager
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 20:46:00 -
[3]
I hope this makes all faction gear go WAY UP in price, so all the pirates whining about unscannable can whine more.
|
stoicfaux
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 20:56:00 -
[4]
I wonder if they (inadvertently) buffed ECM by reducing ECCM's effectiveness to implement the unprobable change.
Nah, probably just tweaked the scanning formula and as a side effect, either made it easier to scan down sites, or made it impossible to scan down sites.
-----
"Are you a sociopathic paranoid schizophrenic with accounting skills? We have the game for you!
-- Eve, the game of Alts, Economics, Machiavelli, and PvP"
|
Aandaan
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:01:00 -
[5]
Ok, what the hell are they doing now??????
They are listening to the complainers again aren't they.
Leave the ships alone, things are fine and don't need to be touched.
Aandaan
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:33:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Lady Go Diveher
Linky link
and Fallout confirms :
CCP Fallout on twitter
You'll need to expand the conversation he has with @webspaceships
trolololollll
I'm so happy I could post threads!
Chapeau! Dunno how you did it, but you and your pirate whine actually pushed this thru. Needless to say, I have no love for CCP Fallout -- and that's putting it mildly.
You, otoh, can go celebrate; you earnt it.
--
|
|
CCP Dropbear
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:35:00 -
[7]
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet other ways to adapt.
|
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:46:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
Funny you should mention 'research, time, funding and piloting skill,' as you just nullified those. Oh, and you forgot implants.
And, praytell, what if indeed we do manage to adapt? Will you nerf that too?
--
|
Angsty Teenager
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:53:00 -
[9]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt, if you nerf supercaps.
Have you looked at both sides of the supercap dilemma?
In the end it comes down to a simple principle. If you don't want to die, don't fight. If you are fighting, you shouldn't be able to simply log off and avoid the fight it if turns bad.
Why?
Because a well-fit supercap in the hands of even an unskilled pilot can cause damage that is out of alignment with the risk involved in doing it, and this has crept into all of 0.0 gameplay over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
|
Bologna Brains
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:54:00 -
[10]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
ADAPT ---> NERF
|
|
|
Skex Relbore
Gallente
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 21:59:00 -
[11]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
The problem is that being vulnerable to scanning simply means being scanned. There is no chance of failure on the scanners side and you've just removed the one situation under which they could be countered.
Honestly you should make it harder to scan down ships inside mission space not easier. Low sec is already pretty much unpopulated and you just reduced that population even more now that those people who were running missions in Unprobable T3s just refit and move to high sec.
Or just say screw it and start playing war of tanks cause they lost their means of financing their PVP.
Short sighted once again.
Oh and when the hell are you going to fix the friggin Fitting tool? Funny how you could find time for this when you can't find time to even acknowledge that screw-up.
|
clixor
Celluloid Gurus
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:00:00 -
[12]
not being picked up yet by the other forum sections.. let's savior this knowledge a bit .. and make popcorn. 
|
Makko Gray
Nexus Aerospace Corporation
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:15:00 -
[13]
Awesome! Great stuff :D
|
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:16:00 -
[14]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Oh, and another thing: you didn't even make it harder to scan people down, did you? No full set of implants required, no max skills.... you simply caved to CCP Fallout, like a pudding.
You know, somewhere in these threads someone asked whether you got our back on this. I guess now we know: you didn't.
--
|
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:22:00 -
[15]
Excellent change, but they should have nuked off-grid gangboosting as well. Hey ho, small steps.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:42:00 -
[16]
So, HOW EXACTLY did you make this happen ?
Did you tweak the scan formula or did you modify some module/item stats ?
If you tweaked the formula, did you simply top-cap or bottom-cap some values ? Which ones and at what value ?
Or did you simply make it so that ANY ship can be scanned by ANY prober by capping the final result ?
This could mean anything from "good job" to "you've got to be freaking kidding me", depending on what exactly did you guys do.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Qalix
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:54:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Akita T
So, HOW EXACTLY did you make this happen ?
Did you tweak the scan formula or did you modify some module/item stats ?
If you tweaked the formula, did you simply top-cap or bottom-cap some values ? Which ones and at what value ?
Or did you simply make it so that ANY ship can be scanned by ANY prober by capping the final result ?
This could mean anything from "good job" to "you've got to be freaking kidding me", depending on what exactly did you guys do.
I'm interested to know as well. The notes mention that all probes contribute now. Were implants removed from teh calculation? Or is it possible that sig strength is no longer part of the equation. |
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 22:54:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Akita T
So, HOW EXACTLY did you make this happen ?
Did you tweak the scan formula or did you modify some module/item stats ?
If you tweaked the formula, did you simply top-cap or bottom-cap some values ? Which ones and at what value ?
Or did you simply make it so that ANY ship can be scanned by ANY prober by capping the final result ?
This could mean anything from "good job" to "you've got to be freaking kidding me", depending on what exactly did you guys do.
^this
It's a "fix" for a problem that doesn't exist, and may break a lot of things in the process.
|
WarGod
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:07:00 -
[19]
Can you unplug these gay implants from my jump clone if you're removing their only use.
|
Shaemell Buttleson
Euphoria Released
HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:07:00 -
[20]
It still won't be good enough for the ppl that wanted it.
The next they they will say is it needs to be like the missions in FW where everyone can see where they are on the overview!
* Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. - CCP Ildoge
|
|
|
Vincent Athena
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:15:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Vincent Athena on 20/06/2011 23:16:15
Originally by: Akita T
So, HOW EXACTLY did you make this happen ?
Did you tweak the scan formula or did you modify some module/item stats ?
If you tweaked the formula, did you simply top-cap or bottom-cap some values ? Which ones and at what value ?
Or did you simply make it so that ANY ship can be scanned by ANY prober by capping the final result ?
This could mean anything from "good job" to "you've got to be freaking kidding me", depending on what exactly did you guys do.
Patch notes say by having all probes help increase the signal strength, so you need to use more than 4 probes to get the job done.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:23:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Patch notes say by having all probes help increase the signal strength, so you need to use more than 4 probes to get the job done.
There's a relation, but you're assuming causation where no such assumption is warranted.
Also, over here they said just a short while ago:
Quote:
IIRC we just placed a minimum cap on the signal strength return you can get from a target. Don't remember off-hand what the exact number is, but it isn't very big.
Which could mean (depending on what else was altered, if anything other than these two things) that probing just got a whole damn lot easier all across the board.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts
|
Internet White Knight
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:24:00 -
[23]
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
Edited by: CCP Dropbear on 20/06/2011 21:38:43
Both sides were looked at. In the end it came down to a simple principle. If you want to be impervious to scanning, use a cloak. If you are doing something that requires dropping cloak, you should be vulnerable to scanning whilst doing it.
Why?
Because a well-fit, unprobeable ship in the hands of a skilled pilot can reap rewards that are out of alignment with the risk involved in getting them, and this has crept into a lot of gameplay areas over time.
My suspicion: the type of people who put the research, time, funding and piloting skill into making unprobable tactics work for them (either militarily or economically) are the type who will find yet more ways to adapt.
Guess that means you've fixed the static (only ever in Mandoo) nature of "A Worthy Task" that piebears love to camp to probe down people trying to do their once-only mission there? Because there's no way in hell to do that mission yourself if you're not unprobeable. Someone WILL scan you down and jack your loot. |
Ranka Mei
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:25:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Ranka Mei on 20/06/2011 23:25:10
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Patch notes say by having all probes help increase the signal strength, so you need to use more than 4 probes to get the job done.
Or that just means: 'There's no longer a cap on the number of contributing probes, so the sky is the limit! Enjoy your gift from CCP Fallout.' That's how I read it, at least.
--
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:26:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Vincent Athena
Patch notes say by having all probes help increase the signal strength, so you need to use more than 4 probes to get the job done.
There's a relation, but you're assuming causation where no such assumption is warranted.
Also, over here they said just a short while ago:
Quote:
IIRC we just placed a minimum cap on the signal strength return you can get from a target. Don't remember off-hand what the exact number is, but it isn't very big.
Which could mean (depending on what else was altered, if anything other than these two things) that probing just got a whole damn lot easier all across the board.
...and lolsec gets a lot emptier.
|
Lady Go Diveher
|
Posted - 2011.06.20 23:44:00 -
[26]
Anyone who thinks this will make lowsec 'emptier' obviously has no idea what these players were doing in the first place. They take every gate jump in a shuttle (I know, I've killed loads of the ****ing things) and undock using the invulnerability shield to make sure its 100% safe before proceeding.
These players had already decided NOT to interact with lowsec, by making themselves unprobable. They were literally removing themselves from the grid from the POV of the other players.
This change means the decision is thus:
- Do I mission in lowsec for more SP but added risk or
- Do I mission in highsec for less SP but little risk?
Which is how it should be. Before, it was "Do I mission in lowsec for more SP and HAHAHAHAHAH i can haz copy-paste from battleclinic special magic no findy fit.
@Ranka - glad to see you posting in this thread. I really will accept contracts for your stuff. I'm sure you'll moan your Tengu is worth less now anyway
As a point of reference and to say it here, I did run missions in an unprobable fit before this change, because you're a baffoon not to. I support this change regardless, as I also spend time on the other side of the coin trying to break others shiney toys
|
Ildryn
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 00:00:00 -
[27]
About time. Use a cloak or gtfo.
|
Tetragammatron Prime
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 00:14:00 -
[28]
If you can fly unprobeable tengu then you should be able to fly 100mn ab pvp fit tengu which can do all lvl4 missions with ease (even can dp gurista 10/10 with it) and it is great for fighting or escaping if needed.
|
Judicator Saturnius
Amarr
Viziam
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 00:18:00 -
[29]
Win
vOv
|
Olleybear
Minmatar
I R' Carebear
|
Posted - 2011.06.21 00:34:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Olleybear on 21/06/2011 00:42:24
I have been described as a huge carebear and I support this change.
I also support the moving of all agents back to highsec, including lvl 5 missions. The content in lowsec is barely used by any of the player base. As an occasional normal mission runner, I would like to see additional content for missions and the easiest way to get new content is to simply make the lowsec only missions available in highsec. The time that was spent on creating those missions will now be enjoyable by more of the player base and will be a huge win for us bored carebears. Of course, you may have to gouge out your own eyes in the highsec mission hubs due to the, ummm.... excellent conversations taking place in local.
Start running Faction Warefare lvl 4 missions in a stealthbomber fellas. Currently, even though it has a gate on the overview, Faction Warefare missions in a stealth bomber are still much safer than running any normal agent kill mission in lowsec.
I fully endorse this scan probe change as it allows me more time to wax and polish my faction/deadspace fit mission ships instead of flying them in the harsh environment of outerspace.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |