Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 81 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
256
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:29:00 -
[421] - Quote
Carcopino wrote:Robert Caldera wrote: there is nothing about "self-styling", as soon as you engage another player its pvp, regardless of whatever he's doing even with a shitfit pve ship. In fact, bears becoming even more safe in 0.0 anomalies/plexes in already too safe place like 0.0 is a serious problem and very one sided. I dont know if you ever tried to catch a ratter in 0.0, but this has become a ridiculously hard task and a lot of pvp already prior landing your first shot at all.
This patch would remove a big part of risk for 0.0 bears and a big part of pvp - hunting and shooting ratters is apart of sov shiit battes a major part of it, whether you like it or not - while it doesnt introduce any other kind of pvp in return, hence its reducing amount of pvp in eve, which cant be a good thing regardless of everything else.
Look, I don't mean to belittle your efforts or anything like that, I understand that hunting down fellas in enemy controlled space is a warfare tool and a risky activity. What is amusing to me, though, is the thought that, for some reason, the npcs should spare the mission-guy hunter. That would be kinda difficult to justify..What would be more fun that both hunter and victim having to warp away in pods due to npc wrath?.
It's not difficult to justify at all.
Why would the captains of the NPC ships who are getting SLAUGHTERED as soon as they appear by some mad man in a Tengu suddenly say "hey, there is this other guy who just warped in and is trying to kill the guy captaining the Tengu who is slaughtering us, well we can't have that, KILL OUR RESCUER BEFORE HE RESCUES US??!?!?!
It makes perfect sense for the NPCs to wait till the actual immediate threat is dead before trying to kill the second (only potential) threat. Good pirate AI would recognize the concept of "enemy of my enemy is my friend, at least till 1st enemy is dead" lol
|
Credacom
Mission Services
2
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:30:00 -
[422] - Quote
Starakus wrote:Before I cancel both my accounts due to this proposed AI work, can you explain how these proposed AI changes are in any way part of your attempts to listen to the player community and fix existing broken content rather than actually creating an upheaval and breaking working content?
Have you bothered to read all of these concerns that your proposed changes to AI are stirring up? Yet this is only a preliminary view of the problems your creating, something which probably could have been hammered out over lunch before even attempting to introduce this information to the player community.
All of your focus and what you will be working on from now until the winter release are the AI as your main priority? How is this not a 180 turn from what you have proposed as far as your promises to stop doing this sort of thing?
Why are your priorities not fixing existing broken content as in: -The bounty system -The alliance and corporation system -bounding box and PC/NPC hangup issues on asteriods/gates/stations -random disconnects -Promised UI fixes
I was lured back with the intent that CCP would stop breaking things so they could fix them and fix the things that were already broken instead. I have a few days to decide and almost a decade worth of work to consider losing so I figured I would ask a legitimate question instead of rage quitting, which seems to already be happening on this thread.
This There is no immediate need for this fix and many would argue it will do more harm than good. Leave it alone and focus on the harder dev challenges that no one seems to want to attempt.
|
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Dark Therapy
1056
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:44:00 -
[423] - Quote
This is great stuff. MIssions should not be so easy that peopel can farm them while doing the laundry.. And lets face it that i show easy they are at the moment. The only people crying are those who still want to mission afk.
As for eventually making fitting for missions much like fitting for pvp, awesome stuff, peopel can switch from pve to pvp and back, just as it should be. If someone is sat out doing anomolies, it is only right that if they get proped down and dropped on that they can defend themselves rather than just being dead in the water. Ratters and so on will still be hunted, it will just be a riskier game to play.
All in all, great work team Five O. Keep it going till we have that play balanced between pve and pvp. Trust me, I almost know what I'm doing. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
422
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:45:00 -
[424] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Have you considered not decloaking until the rats are dead? You're in a stealth bomber that locks pretty much instantly. lol you clearly have no idea whats going on. 0.0 isnt like high sec where a ratter happily goes on missioning with 80 neutrals in local. As soon as neutral appears in local, almost everyone will warp out to station/POS/safe or logoff, even if not much earlier as soon as you get reported in intel channels 2 jumps away. Getting there intime and see the ship on grid already requires a lot of effort and luck, so waiting till NPCs are done isnt an option at all - either you grab him at first chance or you wont kill anything there. Mike Voidstar wrote:So, the pirate pvp types are upset because their pve fit targets might have a chance in an actual fight instead of just being the Target in a one sided gankfest? f*ck off f*ggot, there is no fair fight in eve you play wrong game. Eve is all about either gank or getting ganked. Wont even further discuss with you about anything related.
The thing is, the issues you are describing come from flawed game mechanics and the problem we currently have with risk vs reward in eve (i.e. lvl 4 mission runners grinding isk without risk), not necessarily NPC AI... Maybe you should be requesting that all null/low sec belt rats are fitted with scrams, instead of pointing out the faults with this proposal.
Who knows, maybe all the people in here crying about how they won't be able to afk mission anyone will move to null sec for a better reward for their time, and you will have more ppl to kill.
They see me trolling, they hating... |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
1
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:53:00 -
[425] - Quote
If you really want players to fly missions similarly to PvP, you need to change the Mission content so that
- it can be reasonably buffer tanked as long as own DPS is high enough - DPS come in too quickly to tank with a sustainable tank - number of NPCs is vastly reduced but single NPC DPS increased - using EWAR modules on NPCs is a valid strategy
Once ALL of those points have been checked, you can start thinking about improving AI to make it similar to player behaviour. |
Li Charen-Teng
19
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:53:00 -
[426] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Who knows, maybe all the people in here crying about how they won't be able to afk mission anyone will move to null sec for a better reward for their time, and you will have more ppl to kill.
High-sec missions have about the same reward than null-sec with a lot less risk, especially since the agent changes a year ago.
Checking EVE GATE every few minutes... |
Hakaru Ishiwara
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
321
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:54:00 -
[427] - Quote
MIrple wrote:*snip* Rat Aggro should be standings based. If you want to go hunt out in 0.0 and dont want the rats to shoot you get standings towards them. This would help tie in the lore better and make it so people that still want to hunt in null can. Not sure if this would be hard to implement but I would think this would be the same mechanic as faction police in empire. /signed. With NPC stations and pirate faction agents in deep null-sec, this makes perfect sense. I have often wondered why this was not the case as this is a great sandbox / role playing element for null-sec residents.
And if there was room to exploit good standings in order to get to a high-value NPC, then simply lock down the dead-space gates used to access those NPCs.
+++++++ I have never shed a tear for a fellow EVE player until now. Mark GÇ£SeleeneGÇ¥ Heard's Blog Honoring Sean "Vile Rat" Smith. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
423
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:58:00 -
[428] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: The thing is, the issues you are describing come from flawed game mechanics and the problem we currently have with risk vs reward in eve (i.e. lvl 4 mission runners grinding isk without risk), not necessarily NPC AI...
awake people GTFOing instantly as you appear without any chance of getting them has nothing to do with rewards they are cashing in. Maybe you would attract a lot of other unaware people which get killed as consequence but even they learn fast how to avoid risks. Dont want to start a separate discussion about that, just pointed out whats wrong with your suggestion.
Rek Seven wrote:Maybe you should be requesting that all null/low sec belt rats are fitted with scrams, instead of pointing out the faults with this proposal. already done in many other threads, however I focus here on what has been announced, everything else would be off-topic.
Hakaru Ishiwara wrote:MIrple wrote:*snip* Rat Aggro should be standings based. If you want to go hunt out in 0.0 and dont want the rats to shoot you get standings towards them. This would help tie in the lore better and make it so people that still want to hunt in null can. Not sure if this would be hard to implement but I would think this would be the same mechanic as faction police in empire. /signed. With NPC stations and pirate faction agents in deep null-sec, this makes perfect sense. I have often wondered why this was not the case as this is a great sandbox / role playing element for null-sec residents. And if there was room to exploit good standings in order to get to a high-value NPC, then simply lock down the dead-space gates used to access those NPCs.
the downside of this proposal is that everyone who wants to kill anything solo would have to grind standing at local agents first like a mongoloid, then imagine, your alliance moves on to different grounds where you already f*cked up your standings to minmatar for instance, you'll end up with the same bad situation as stated before. I would prefer aggro-based approach on that which means rats dont shoot first. |
Vegare
Stranger Things A Point In Space
59
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 13:58:00 -
[429] - Quote
How will this affect travelling through higsec when being chased by the faction militia (for example because of low standings)? Will the faction police still apply their webs first? |
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
730
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:00:00 -
[430] - Quote
Overall this is positive. Giving NPCs better AI is not bad by default. Having them target swap and adding more challenge is cool. However, making them shoot drones is not. I can see why it's appealing to kill off potential botting ships using drones, or people just putting out drones and going afk, but consider this:
1) Alpha damage from NPCs in mission/plex/anything but belts can easily alpha even sentries, so no matter how you babysit that's still making sentries useless, even if you could theoreticly insta-scoop them. 2) Lights sometimes travel quite far to chase down targets, and many mission/plex/anomships that has some size (battleships) uses light drones to keep ewar, web, scrambler etc off. Are you saying that it's reasonable that players loses Marauders because their drones got volley'd by NPCs? Even if you babysit the drones this is bound to happen, especially when they travel back after you recall them (they usually eat quite alot of damage then with MWD on). 3) Missions and plexes where you can face up to tens of scrambling/jamming/td'ing/webbing frigs could potentially be a major issue unless you bring a sub-bs-weaponry ship.
I have to assume that CCP think this: "PvE is for blobs, just like PvP, so suck it up and play in gangs" "You're not supposed to be able to save drones, even if you 100% babysit them, they will eventually die"
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you on both points. As much as I enjoyed running lv4 in corp gangs back when lv4 was nothing for every man. It was fun and somewhat of a challenge. But it was bad already when you made officers tank so much that you need to bring capitals or fleets to kill them. Every change you do is promoting blobbing, and I'm curious if you ever considered that not all players want to blob? Drone changes is one, because in small scale (solo, dualboxing) PvE, drones are literally your best defence against NPC's that ewar + scramble/web you.
A Paladin with x NPCs that TD him rely on his drones. If you run Sanshas the Blockade, you can't even kill the t2 cruisers in the 2nd wave with a common beam setup (assuming they put their TD on you, and you have a few tracking mods fitted, with beams and navy micro crystal). Sometimes you are lucky and time it well and pop them before they can apply their TD, and boom it's really easy wave. Sometimes they lock you down completely, orbiting under your guns and your only hope is your medium drones. Literally this single wave can make a fast-running missions into a slow-running one, purely based on this, and your best bet is your drones. One counter is (was?) to use a missile ship, but with the proposed changes by you guys that TD affect missiles too.. losing your drones when you sit there TD'd to hell and can't hit stuff is a horrendous change.
AFK-running Dominixes is not an issue either, I've used those myself and you need quite alot of them to make any decent money. AFK-ing plexes with sentry drones have been deemed an exploit. So why exactly would you need to do this? Let the poor drones be left alone, or massively boost their defences vs NPCs so a pilot that is active at the keyboard at least can pull them back to his drone bay before they die. I.e. give NPC's something like 20-30% damage done vs drones, it needs a significant drop or the initial spawns in missions/plexes will volley the drones.
Am all for AI changes, but leave the poor drones alone. Seriously. AFK-cloaking in a system near you. |
|
Mabrjjcj Rojo
0ne Percent. Transmission Lost
5
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:12:00 -
[431] - Quote
The first 5 pages were interesting, but sorry for not reading all of them. I've seen you're changing sleeper activity, it seems in the context of Incursions. Would you address your impacts to the sleepers in worm-hole space?
|
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Executive Outcomes
239
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:16:00 -
[432] - Quote
Mabrjjcj Rojo wrote:The first 5 pages were interesting, but sorry for not reading all of them. I've seen you're changing sleeper activity, it seems in the context of Incursions. Would you address your impacts to the sleepers in worm-hole space?
sleepers are not changing (read the blog again)
Also HAHHAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHA
some of the posts are awesome! rage quits, trolls and general stupidity!!! made my day reading these.
And you even got a few half decent pages out too - Nulla Curas |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
423
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:20:00 -
[433] - Quote
From the wording, it sounded like the current sleeper and incursion sites won't change but maybe CCP are thinking about adding new sites with new AI... People have been asking for sleeper sites to be changed so that they aren't as predictable as missions for a long time now. They see me trolling, they hating... |
ChromeStriker
The Riot Formation Executive Outcomes
239
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:20:00 -
[434] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:From the wording, it sounded like the current sleeper and incursion sites won't change but maybe CCP are thinking about adding new sites with new AI... People have been asking for sleeper sites to be changed so that they aren't as predictable as missions for a long time now.
2 sec....
edit:
CCP FoxFour wrote:Simon Severasse wrote:Does the "attack ships of the same size as the NPC" apply to wh too? No, I did not touch the sleepers. While it is true sleepers have the Level One AI, they have a version of it without any customization. The customization was added when we introduced Incursions.
there you go - Nulla Curas |
Sir John Halsey
6
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:26:00 -
[435] - Quote
Despana wrote:Despana wrote:I can't believe so many people actually HAPPY about this changes....
How about you will turn on your brains before you post something in here and make CCP think they are on the right path?
Let me tell you why I will quit this game if this changes will go live:
I play eve since 2004 and I am not a big fan of gangs, fleets etc. Because this game is sandbox, it gives us free choice what to do. My choice is SOLO, period, and here's why it will kill 95% of my fun:
I do fly Assaults and other small ships ships in null / low sec. to catch belt, anomaly, mission hunters on small ships and then kill them when they don't pay enough attention to local and d-scan. Now, killing drakes, ravens, dominixes and other hunter will be impossible on small ships, because I won't have enough time to kill them before NPC's will trim me off.
Covert OP bombers? Forget about it. We barely could orbit tank ships without NPC's attacking us, now - no chance at all.
Basically, killing people while they are doing their hunting will be impossible on small and even medium ships.
By any means, killing solo pvp will NOT make people happy. THIS.Killing entire PVP category in null/low sec just to make a small tweak in PVE? I thought this is PVP based game.... oh god, FoxFour even ignored my first post.
So, going to kill somebody in a pirate nest should be easy? Like ... the pirates should not be offended when somebody who comes to kill their prey? More loot for them ... HTFU |
Alayna Le'line
25
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:52:00 -
[436] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Q) Will NPC's kill my drones? A) Yes, but they don't hate them nearly as much as sleepers. I ran 9 level 4 missions and lost 2 drones. It does mean you need to pay more attention though. We can adjust their hatred of drones though which is why we are asking for feedback when this hits a test server.
Please fix drones first.
I welcome missions being less mind-numbingly boring but the drone UI/AI is so godawful that I've actually stopped training the last few skills I need for "perfect" drone skills and started training up gunnery skills instead. |
Starakus
Shrouded in secret
4
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 14:53:00 -
[437] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:I'm not sure whether or not this has been reported earlier. But in the last 3 or 4 weeks i have recognized something i haven't encountered so far on Tranquility. I went into the Metropolis Region and did some belt-ratting in lowsec with a corpmember. I also warped into Cosmic anomalies in Highsec, in some there was already another player flying the site. I can tell you, i have been VERY surprised in lowsec belts, when Red-blinking NPCs went from red to yellow and started applying damage onto my buddy. And i have also been very surprised when some rats in a cosmic anomaly, clearly agressing another player already in, started yellowboxing and approaching me, him still on the field.
So i really don't know whether or not the whole target switching thingy on rats is all new for beltrats / anoms, or something that maybe has been lurking on tq for quite some time now...
I can attest to this change and have seen it on some lv 4 missions also especially with drone missions. Withdraw of sentries, re-aggro, and redeploy induces aggro switch to drones again and range is same as ship so its not a targeting switch due to range. This has been stealth for a bit now as they "improve" |
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 15:33:00 -
[438] - Quote
What do I do? I mission in high sec with my friends. I would love to mission in areas where I could pvp some too, but the current paradigm of hunt or be victimized does not appeal to me. I would at this moment be a potential Target in low-sec if it didn't involve me signing up to either sit in station all night (not fun), dedicating myself to hunting someone who is going to sit in station all night (not fun for me) or being someone's fresh salvage and epeen buff boy. Instead I mostly avoid the issue by staying in an environment where I can manage my risk to my own comfort level, and just think how it would be nice to move to greener pastures if only it wasn't certain to be a waste of time and effort because I'm either in station or dead.
The problem is that style of play makes it fun for one person to completly ruin my fun, with nothing I can do about it because of the mechanics of the game. It don't have to be a 'fair' fight, I just need to have a non-zero chance of fighting back.
I highly doubt that the AI change will accomplish this on its own. For the stated goal of bringing pve and pvp closer together both playstyles will have to shift... Meaning local repair will have to be viable on ships bonuses for it, not just buffer and remote rep all day. Pve ships will need the tools to provide a fight to their pvp attackers while engaged in pve, and pvp ships will need the tools to deal with pve settings as well as their targets. Both parties must have the need to deal with the other, not one group simply be easy targets for the other.
But for the conversation at hand, this change needs to come, but it needs to come with the tools to deal with it too, which means some way of effective fleet defense, and some major changes to the very nature of drones. |
Ochiniwa
New Republic The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:39:00 -
[439] - Quote
Well I have not read all the comments above due to lack of time and interest :))
I just wanted to let CCP know that I think this is one of the major upgrades in the game which I have been looking forward to since the introduction of the sleepers AI!
There are other changes that I was looking forward to that would the game more interesting which have certainly all been mentioned already:
- Change the spawning of rats and make it more random - Make the Security Status variable depending on what players do. This would be most fun and would make the game VERY dynamic, imaging Jita becoming 0.4 sec status. Like for example the more rats are killed in a system, the higher the sec status becomes, respectively the more player kills the lower the sec status, evolving over months :))
Just some brainstorming ideas!
Cheers, Ochi |
Gevlin
SMANews.net SpaceMonkey's Alliance
194
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:53:00 -
[440] - Quote
This change should increase the retention of players in eve.It has been said over and over again ratting has become repeative, predictable and boring.
If the players want to do something that is repeaditve, predictable and boring. Try Mining,
So go a head loose those accounts that lost the desire to play the game. this change will keep people interested in the game longer.
People who are active in the ame provide content, those who have lost the will to enjoy the game, should leave the game for a while, train some long skills and Cohen come back with fresh eyes
Some day I will have the internet and be able to play again. |
|
Spc One
The Chodak Void Alliance
82
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 16:53:00 -
[441] - Quote
Carcopino wrote:How about you go and add more missions, improve existing ones, add more epic arcs, plex sites, give some function to dead npc factions/corporations or whatever ?. Now THAT would be worth writing home about. Hell, even getting rid of npcs getting stuck on various clutter or bumping away at supersonic speed would do a whole lot more good. Bah. I agree.
|
Lyron-Baktos
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
317
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 17:44:00 -
[442] - Quote
I don't do any missions so these changes will not affect me at all but I do agree with some of the people here. Why is CCP working on items that nobody is complaining about, or cares about, when there are multiple, multiple issues out there that are very broken?
Fix the obvious broken issues first before trying to improve something that is low priority. Selective Pressure [FOVRA] is now recruiting! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1797934#post1797934 |
Martin0
Maximum-Overload
67
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:02:00 -
[443] - Quote
To all the people worried of theyr drones. I did ratted in whormoles with a myrmidon and the sleepers never engaged my drones. Sleepers hate e-war (of any kind) more than drones, just fit a web or a target painter and your drones will be (almost) safe. |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
660
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:02:00 -
[444] - Quote
Mabrjjcj Rojo wrote:The first 5 pages were interesting, but sorry for not reading all of them. I've seen you're changing sleeper activity, it seems in the context of Incursions. Would you address your impacts to the sleepers in worm-hole space?
We are NOT changing sleepers at all with this change. We are applying the newer AI, with some changes, to other NPC. Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
Dersen Lowery
Knavery Inc. StructureDamage
103
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 18:04:00 -
[445] - Quote
Spc One wrote:Carcopino wrote: How about you go and add more missions, improve existing ones, add more epic arcs, plex sites, give some function to dead npc factions/corporations or whatever ?. Now THAT would be worth writing home about. Hell, even getting rid of npcs getting stuck on various clutter or bumping away at supersonic speed would do a whole lot more good.
I agree.
Then you support this change, because FoxFour has said that they're swapping in an AI that is not only better, but customizable. That should be the first priority before building a whole bunch of content. Otherwise, you're just building it on the old system, and you have that much more work and that much more rebalancing to do when you upgrade.
Also, frankly, they should fix the existing PVE before they add new ones, because some of them (the COSMOS missions in particular) are badly broken, and they're both highly useful (for standings boosts) and an introduction to the underlying lore--especially the epic arcs. |
Psycros
Pod Jockey's International Corp
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 19:05:00 -
[446] - Quote
Despana wrote:I can't believe so many people actually HAPPY about this changes....
How about you will turn on your brains before you post something in here and make CCP think they are on the right path?
Let me tell you why I will quit this game if this changes will go live:
I play eve since 2004 and I am not a big fan of gangs, fleets etc. Because this game is sandbox, it gives us free choice what to do. My choice is SOLO, period, and here's why it will kill 95% of my fun:
I do fly Assaults and other small ships ships in null / low sec. to catch belt, anomaly, mission hunters on small ships and then kill them when they don't pay enough attention to local and d-scan. Now, killing drakes, ravens, dominixes and other hunter will be impossible on small ships, because I won't have enough time to kill them before NPC's will trim me off.
Covert OP bombers? Forget about it. We barely could orbit tank ships without NPC's attacking us, now - no chance at all.
Basically, killing people while they are doing their hunting will be impossible on small and even medium ships.
By any means, killing solo pvp will NOT make people happy.
LOL! "Solo PvP", i.e. ganking people without PvP fits. Your tears are truly delicious. Yes, please quit and take as many of your fellow cowards along with you as possible |
Lord Zim
1516
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 19:08:00 -
[447] - Quote
Psycros wrote:Your tears are truly delicious. Whoa. What an absolutely original thing to post. I am in shock and awe, I've never seen this before, ever. Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilotn++ won't be jumping home. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
407
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 19:51:00 -
[448] - Quote
Are we not getting the CONCORD fix on duality today then? This weekend at all? It would be nice to test the changes in high sec as well.
|
Care Bear King
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 19:51:00 -
[449] - Quote
Drones:
1. Watch the NPC aggro; Drone boats are worthless in WH space and most will assume they will be worthless for missioning after this change until shown otherwise.
2. Fix the 'lose drones on disconnect' issue by having them follow your ship into warp (please).
3. Useful Drone AI would be nice, but I realize that is asking too much.
Level 1 AI:
1. Please realize that this will have very little impact on solo missioners running high sec missions. The impact is going to be on content that involves groups (L5? exploration content?). It's mostly just going to be an annoyance to Domi and Hulk pilots.
2. Thank you for the nerf to can flippers, ninja salvagers, etc. It was a long time coming.
3. Thank you for this step toward making low sec missions more viable. You're still not quite there, however.
PODS:
Go ahead with AI podding please - just restrict it to L4+. If my memory is correct, pilots don't need to worry about scrams until L3. Podding could be a similar step up at L4. Perhaps at L5 you're subject to podding, scrams on your pod, etc. Throw out a pop-up the first time someone accepts a L3 mission (you may be scrammed), L4 mission (you may be podded), etc. and people won't throw a fit. Anyone who is going to rage quit over losing a clone on a level 4 mission was already going to rage quite over losing their mission running ship anyway. |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
1909
|
Posted - 2012.09.21 20:19:00 -
[450] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote: As for the drone hate: This is something we are keeping a very close eye on and have already tweaked several times. We are working hard to find the right balance between just killing all drones and drone pilots having to pay attention.
Please take this into account.
There are some missions where warp scrambling frigates put up to 4+ warp disruptions and a pair of webs. Those warp scrambling frigates are also a lot more resilient than regular frigates so it can take half a minute to kill each. In the mean time you could be under sentry / NOS focus as well.
If you make the AI kill the drones before the drones killed most of them, then it'll be impossible to kill all those though frigates and thus there'll be either a stalemate or a ship loss. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 35 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |