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) |
Yewan
Kung-Fu Fighting Club
2
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 00:01:00 -
[811] - Quote
eXeler0n wrote:Yeahy! No more boring missions, but wait? When I do missions solo in a Tengu, is there anything changing for me? I fly into the mission and fire my missiles until there is nothing left that was red and blinky...
This...*points up* ...drone-type afk solo in sub cap ends, missile type solo level 4s for iskies remains.
Is it just me or is taking time to program tweak an AI for NPCs to fix a perceived "lack of challenge" a problem that was only a minor problem for some players who were irritated at other players who second account afk ... seems a bit... distracting. Who asked for this limited AI fix again? Did the NPC solo-types beg for this?
In other words, real ISK grinding with tanked and spidered BSs in WH or 0.0 plex grinding with carriers remains no real problem... but non-allied solo players who grind 25 mill isk per session, or low level noob types who used to accompany corp mates for kicks and giggles and salvage... with drone boats... needed to be fixed...
There are tons of group play non-AI type issues that could use love. Like announce ... "complex spawn triggers are now random... so yeah, good luck" or "spawn wave strengths are now pro-rated / calculated based on the number of player ships and their sizes within a 200km radius on trigger... so yeah... good luck" could require real teamwork to adjust for... but it's done so hey... thank you for taking time to adjust it...
Anyway, to confirm: My Tengu missile boat, orbit a can at 5k and almost afk play by occasionally remembering my second account needs a target change... Still seems to work fine... since the relative strength of the AI boats seem to be on par with what they were... end of rant.
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
731
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 09:28:00 -
[812] - Quote
Adigard wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. The answer given that I remember (probably from the feedback thread) was that carrier ratting or fighter-assisted ratting in a Tengu is gone... it's virtually impossible since everything swaps to fighters full time. Someone should probably run some tests whenever the test servers come back online because I only recall one test. Lfod Shi wrote:Easy solution: Stay ATK (Attached To Keyboard). Ya know, the way the designers intended the game to be played... or whatever. You know... the Dev's specifically tested the dual AFK Domi fit, and discovered it was even easier than before this change was implemented... So no, not at all. This change apparently specifically buffs AFK drone play, while punishing folks who actually do pay attention and try to fit DPS on their ships.
What I tested was dual Dominix but I had to stay at the keyboard managing drones and the tank of my both my Dominix. Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
732
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 10:58:00 -
[813] - Quote
darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating.
Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier? Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
Adigard
RubberDuckies -Entropy-
19
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 11:25:00 -
[814] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:What I tested was dual Dominix but I had to stay at the keyboard managing drones and the tank of my both my Dominix.
Because you weren't using the dual Domi AFK sentry fit? just guessing? I've never flown one in my life so I don't (and wouldn't anyway) make any fitting suggestions... but really, you seem to be buffing the play-style you're aiming to break, while breaking other play-styles willy-nilly.
My concern is still that you guys are making the life of ATK drone user's harder, while making things easier for AFK drone user's. Now an AFK 2x Domi would never venture into a DED 10/10 in the first place, but in the relative safety and security of a standard null complex, or the absolute safety of a L4 high-sec? |
Bubanni
ElitistOps Pandemic Legion
460
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 11:55:00 -
[815] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier?
All of it, we want carriers to continue being in anomalies so we can findand kill them... but perhaps increase the number of rats that point/scram when your in a capital... Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke
354
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 12:44:00 -
[816] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier?
last stage of guristas fleet staging point
no need to test it with a mom, bombers will instapop the station :D |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
274
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 13:25:00 -
[817] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier? last stage of guristas fleet staging point no need to test it with a mom, bombers will instapop the station :D
Last stage of ALL the staging points not just Guristas. |
darkness 4
The Lagrangian Mechanics Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 16:04:00 -
[818] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier?
I would test 9 and 10/10 anoms like hordes and patrols since there the only place you will usually find them in pve. |
Womyn Power
Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx
40
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 16:06:00 -
[819] - Quote
First off I want to say that I like your dedication to making eve a better game for everyone, and your zeal for doing it seems to be pretty amazing from what the eve playerbase is used to, so thanks for that.
On the topic of the proposed changes, with regard to tackling ratters in general (and bringing new players on missions/to anoms/etc) have you considered the fact that bar Serpentis pirates, all pirates have something that, when switching to a frigate will either minmatar: target paint (making it basically one shottable by even the elite frigates), amarr: neut (no cap to point or even AB), or caldari: jamming out the frigate (based on the npcs high jam strength vs a frigs low sensor strength). Another point of concern is EWAR and the AIs tendency to prioritize targets who are actively using EWAR (such as scrams, jams, painters, webs, etc) Have you considered the effects of this with tackling frigates in the aforementioned anoms? (example being, warp into a minmatar anom to catch a ratter, scram ratter, instantly locked and painted by all the elite frigs/cruisers in the pocket and killed literally instantly.)
With sweeping changes come a lot of unintended consquiences and I really hope you don't forsake an entire playstyle in this game for what you think is a good (and needed) change right now.
Down the line, making ratters harder to hunt in null simply solidifies the fact that null as it is now, is ironically safer than highsec, simply because people know to be on guard. Making the rats ASSIST the ratters whom they are killing is a fairly laughable solution to this problem.
I suggest making a system whereby if you kill a ratter in any anom, you gain faction standing with said pirates, and at a certain level (+5 possibly?) the rats in said anoms simply will not attack you unless you take criminal action against said NPCs in said anom (along with losing standing for taking a hostile action against said npcs). This would allow you to keep your proposed changes and also alleviate entirely the concerns that face the ratter hunters, while also adding a cool roleplaying mechanic (defending the npcs space as a player, becoming 'blue' with the npcs as you have a long history of having protected them, etc.) I think changes like this are the way you need to take the game to make it a richer experience and I look forward to hearing what direction you end up taking this all, as it has a huge effect on whether or not my alliance exists come winter expansion.
Forgot to mention, this is gonna make bots spike in terms of popularity, not only do you have to not worry about awoxers (lol your own awoxing frig will die before you can warp to the rat) but with pocket concord it's just another layer of security in nullsec, which is definitely NOT needed. |
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
374
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 16:54:00 -
[820] - Quote
Beagle von Space wrote:Missions are mind-numbingly simple, easy to farm, and overpowered as it is. They are a significant part of the low-risk, moderate-to-high reward lifestyle of high sec.
Yes, mistakes may be made that will need to be iterated on when these changes are implemented, but all-in-all, I think these will be for the better.
tl;dr: Your bottomless, semi-afk isk fountain getting nerfed doesn't mean CCP hates you, it means you're not supposed to have bottomless, semi-afk isk fountains.
I'm too young to be a bittervet....
Want to become a young bittervet way too early you should have been doing Incursions before they were utterly crushed in lo/NULL Sec by the Escalaion nerf. In HI SEC the Escalation NERF decimated our numbers. Problem was it was tested by players & CCP didn't listen to the feedback about a single site ( the OTA's ) until months after the complaints were screamed. I would not be surprised if a few mission sites will turn into the Wall of OTAs like what happened to Incursions but there areso many missions such a wall is not impregnatable unlike with Incursions which OTA's where 1/3 of the sites of all Vanguards & became 100% of the sites after all others were finished until the downtime of the next day. Nostalgie ist die Faehigkeit, darueber zu trauern, dass es nicht mehr so ist, wie es frueher nicht gewesen ist. -- Manfred Rommel-á |
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
278
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 17:07:00 -
[821] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier?
Have you tested any lvl 5 missions yet, many of those are done with carriers.
Plus basically any null sec anomaly bigger than a Forsaken Hub. Most null sec signatures have gates, but some of the escalations (fleet Staging point and the end of Hired Gun for example) are open and allow carriers. Each race is different, but all have at least a few signature plexes that esclate into open areas where carriers can be used.
|
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
374
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 17:07:00 -
[822] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Has any testing been done with carriers using both fighters and senturies ? It would be nice to know if we are still going to be able to use them for rating. Any suggestion for what content should be tested with a carrier?
I seem to recall in the last CSM notes that super carrier's in anom's should be nerfed somehow by CCP Soundwave because they are such a faucet... didn't someone mention maybe a in site escalation like in WH's? Nostalgie ist die Faehigkeit, darueber zu trauern, dass es nicht mehr so ist, wie es frueher nicht gewesen ist. -- Manfred Rommel-á |
Mund Richard
5
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 17:08:00 -
[823] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Joker Dronemaster wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:That is very similar to what I had. I didn't load all my rigs with large CCC, but close enough. I have not personally run The Maze on TQ and so don't have a base line to compare to except what people here and at the office have told me.
When I ran the mission today and landed in the final room the Overseer didn't immediately aggro me. I had been told this was because you need to draw it's aggro by doing something. When it did not aggro immediately I therefor assumed this was normal behavior. We have a test server internally that runs the TQ build. I will run the final room on that and compare. It is sounding like the behavior of this weapon has changed.
Shall attempt to test it ASAP. I am working form memory and it has been a few months since I have run this particular complex. But unless I am mistaken; moving your ship, activating a mod, or shooting a rat should be enough to get its attention. That's been my experience, and if Fox isn't getting aggro from the station/overseer within the first few seconds after rmoving or activating a mod, then indeed the beavior has changed. I am still interested in the smart bomb issue, and the time issue as well. When I do the MAZE's 5th room (I dual box a Mach and Tengu) it takes the Mach's drones, the Tengu's FoF missiles and then *after I move the mach off) the guns of my BS to deal with thos damn drones, even an officer smartbom each on 2 domis would take forever to kill even the close in drones. And I mean a LONG time, how many minutes were you sitting there smartbombing frigs Fox before the station shot at something?, becuase if your drones had been out in those minutes to soak up the torp, one or both Domis would be dead, and quick. Slightly off for a weird tangent, but tried smartbombing since I happened to have a dread gurista large one I didnt take to the market yet. Took 6 cycles on a sole ship to take rid of the six orbiting gurista (so appropiate damage) rats I deemed worthy of fiery (erm... kinetic) DOOOM. (Those were the ones that didn't orbit 500meters outside the faction mod's range, while webbing and scramming me down to 5.1 m/s.)
So the torp didnt target/attack during those ~3 cycles it should have taken. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
1017
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 18:43:00 -
[824] - Quote
About gankers invading sites in low and null, and getting attacked by the NPCs:
Many are complaining about this because its removing a play style. Would it be possible to take advantage of the new AI ability to evaluate threats to retain this play style? That is:
Any ship beyond the first to arrive at a site is not considered a threat until it either targets an NPC, an NPC asset, or helps existing players already there.
Essentially the NPCs are saying "We don't know you. You may be an ally. So we will hold fire and see what you do."
Even better would be for the AI to look at corp, alliance, and standings of players arriving at the site. For example, if the player has high standings with the NPC, the threat is set to zero until there is hostile action, even if its the first ship on site. Another example: If the second arriving ship is in the same corp at the first, its considered a threat right away, no need to wait for hostile action.
CCP FoxFour, you are trying to make smart NPCs. Maybe that's all you need to do to fix this issue: Make them actually smart. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
darkness 4
The Lagrangian Mechanics Intrepid Crossing
0
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 18:48:00 -
[825] - Quote
Running anoms and lvl 5 missions should also be checked using subcaps with fighters assigned from a carrier that's sitting at a safe. |
cBOLTSON
Star Frontiers THORN Alliance
72
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 20:12:00 -
[826] - Quote
CCP you should be encouraging people to run anoms, scan down sites, maybe even introduce other things so that the individuals of corporations and alliances make the isk and not the moons.
Carriers running anoms are not overpowered as a good faction bs (or two ;-) ) will make higher cycles. Besides you should be encouraging this type of game play. More stuff for pvpers to hunt! At least if you still want to move away from passive moon income and the like. "Were not elitists, were just tired of fail" - The Sorn |
Adigard
RubberDuckies -Entropy-
19
|
Posted - 2012.10.03 23:12:00 -
[827] - Quote
DarthNefarius wrote:...you should have been doing Incursions before they were utterly crushed in lo/NULL Sec by the Escalaion nerf.
Brought to you by the same team doing this 'fix'.
DarthNefarius wrote:In HI SEC the Escalation NERF decimated our numbers. Problem was it was tested by players & CCP didn't listen to the feedback about a single site ( the OTA's ) until months after the complaints were screamed. I would not be surprised if a few mission sites will turn into the Wall of OTAs like what happened to Incursions but there areso many missions such a wall is not impregnatable unlike with Incursions which OTA's where 1/3 of the sites of all Vanguards & became 100% of the sites after all others were finished until the downtime of the next day.
I mentioned right? Same team? |
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
480
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:18:00 -
[828] - Quote
darkness 4 wrote:Running anoms and lvl 5 missions should also be checked using subcaps with fighters assigned from a carrier that's sitting at a safe.
This |
Adigard
RubberDuckies -Entropy-
19
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:21:00 -
[829] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Running anoms and lvl 5 missions should also be checked using subcaps with fighters assigned from a carrier that's sitting at a safe. This
Sadly we'll probably have to wait until the server's come back up (someday we hope?) else the answer may be something akin to:
"We ran the first room of the Score, L4, in a Tengu with fighter assistance. It was fairly easy, but we lost two fighters to rat aggro. We're okay with this." |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
743
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:43:00 -
[830] - Quote
Adigard wrote:Rommiee wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Running anoms and lvl 5 missions should also be checked using subcaps with fighters assigned from a carrier that's sitting at a safe. This Sadly we'll probably have to wait until the server's come back up (someday we hope?) else the answer may be something akin to: "We ran the first room of the Score, L4, in a Tengu with fighter assistance. It was fairly easy, but we lost two fighters to rat aggro. We're okay with this."
Wait, so fighters are required in a L4 mission now? No, I am not testing that. Please stop. If you honestly have a mission or anomaly or something like that you want me to test please let me know and I will. Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
441
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:46:00 -
[831] - Quote
You should allow people to move drones from their cargo bay to their drone bay so they don't have to fly back to station to load more drones all the time... They see me trolling, they hating... |
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:47:00 -
[832] - Quote
I have previously asked twice about this, and so have many others, without any answer or acknowledgement from CCP. What is your opinion on the fact that this change will inevitably make killing ratters much much more difficult? Nullsec is already far too safe. My preferred solution would be to have the rats focus on players who have aggressed them, or players who aid those who aggress the rats.
As for the high level complex issue, you say you managed to run The Maze in two Dominixes, and while it is good to know it is still possible, it is clearly a bad mechanic if two Dominixes is the only way to do it outside of bringing a dozen people to run it. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Project Wildfire
441
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:50:00 -
[833] - Quote
Witchking Angmar wrote: What is your opinion on the fact that this change will inevitably make killing ratters much much more difficult?
Harden the **** up? They see me trolling, they hating... |
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
29
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:52:00 -
[834] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Witchking Angmar wrote: What is your opinion on the fact that this change will inevitably make killing ratters much much more difficult? Harden the **** up? Are you serious? |
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
744
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 11:59:00 -
[835] - Quote
Cross posting this here from the other thread. What I should have done was posted this here and put a link on the other thread. Sorry.
Quote:Hey guys! So if you don't know who I am I am the guy that is making this change. Just to be clear the dev blog about this can be found over here and the feedback thread for it can be found here. I have been attempting to follow that feedback thread primarily and I apologize for not reading this thread and commenting on it sooner. I would prefer if you had additional feedback that you posted it in the feedback thread above. Now, down to business. I have read a good portion of the thread, if I don't answer your question directly sorry. I will however try and answer as many questions as possible. I have read a few posts stating that devs don't play the game, or that we don't play a specific area of the game such as high sec PvE, or null sec PvE. I can't even begin to tell you how wrong you are. Just in the game design department alone we have people who play both of those areas and much more. This is also not a change we just willy nilly said "well we have nothing else to do so letGÇÖs throw darts at a board and pick something random." This is a change we really feel is needed and really believe in. As most of this thread is focused on the concerns of drone users letGÇÖs start with them. I don't think I made this entirely clear when I posted the dev blog, but one of the factors that go into an NPC picking a target is the sig radius of both the NPC and the target. The NPC prefer to shoot things matching their own sig radius. This means that if you are in a BS with drones, the cruiser and BS sized NPCs will much prefer to target you while the frigates will probably prefer to switch to your drones. In other words; even when the NPC decide to shoot your drones they don't die nearly as quickly as when you accidentally kill the wrong trigger and a whole new wave spawns shooting your drones. Is that a buff to drones? I donGÇÖt know, but it sure is a change. I also don't think I made it entirely clear as to how much threat generation matters to this new NPC. One of the really cool things you can do is take two ships with less tank than is currently required, when one tank is failing do something to generate a lot of threat and have the NPC switch to you. I know, this whole concept of managing aggro is new to EVE but other games have been doing it for a long time. With how smart you guys are, I have faith you will quickly come up with ways to beat the new AI far faster than we can. One of the things I have been doing is using a flight of light drones to kill the frigate NPC and then going with sentry or heavy drones because once the light drones are dead the cruisers and BS basically don't care about drones. Also, a smart bomb is nice for dealing with large numbers of frigates in close. I am actually currently of the opinion that these changes are making missions two easy in some cases. With how the NPC acted before, all you had to do was bring one tank that was good enough to tank them for the entire time. Now all you need a tank enough to survive until you get them to switch targets. I have seen people run missions/PLEX with dual rep Dominix and maybe a bit of RR on a second one. You can now do the same with 0 local rep, some RR, and replace the local reps with drone damage mods. The result? More DPS from you primary form of DPS (your drones) and this fantastic ability to control aggro. People in wormholes and Incursions have been dealing with this new AI for some time now without much of a problem. I have seen wormhole setups that use drones be of great success. The NPC I am giving the new AI to will have a lot less hate towards drones than the ones in Incursions or wormholes. This means drone setups should be even more viable than in either wormholes or Incursions. So drone users, please hold on for just a bit and as soon as our test server is up with these changes I will let you know. Once you have had a chance to test it, died/failed miserably, and tried a new setup I would love some feedback. To give you an example of how these changes have made things too easy in my opinion. I tanked the final room of The Maze, specifically the citadel torpedo launcher that does something like 180k EM damage, with a single flight of light drones. o_O That will probably change, but my point stands. There are plenty of options still out there for drone users. Admittedly for those that solo missions in a ship that has no drones this change means nothing at all. It has the largest impact on drone users and groups of players. Think about this. If we had this AI in from the beginning and came to you and said "hey, we want to swap the AI out to something that will pick the first target it sees and never changes" I am pretty sure we would be laughed at... a lot. Are there going to be people that die to this change? Yea, especially to that crazy citadel torpedo launcher that exists at the end of The Maze and other anomalies. Just like how peopled died to it when we first introduced it. What I advise is that players take extreme care when they are doing any PvE content in which they previously did with more than one ship and/or with drones. Don't trust the guides online, don't trust what you know. Approach it as new content. If you are aware of any specific content in which you fear will be unplayable after this changes please bring it to my attention. I am playing through and testing as much content as I can get my hangs on. What other things are being brought up as concerns? Null sec ganks of people running PvE content. This does have an effect on that no doubt. To be honest yes this means you will no longer be able to do this solo in a stealth bomber. I however just tested it and was able to tank six frigate NPC in my nemesis long enough for another character to jump into the system and warp 73au. I might be wrong but with the amount of EWAR that comes from frigates, and their hatred of drones, most people usually shoot them first when running these. The cruisers and BS never even looked at my Nemesis while I ganked the Raven. I also made sure the Raven was only running local tank so as not to generate any extra threat. If you want to be able to gank these guys solo, then yes it is going to mean you will need to bring something bigger. If there are a lot of frigate NPC on the field, well that will be difficult. We have accepted that as OK. I have read a few posts that state having a way to control aggro is essential to group PvE. I agree and that is why the NPC don't just switch targets at complete random. Things such as EWAR, drones, signature radius, logistics, and more all g...
Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
744
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:00:00 -
[836] - Quote
Witchking Angmar wrote:I have previously asked twice about this, and so have many others, without any answer or acknowledgement from CCP. What is your opinion on the fact that this change will inevitably make killing ratters much much more difficult? Nullsec is already far too safe. My preferred solution would be to have the rats focus on players who have aggressed them, or players who aid those who aggress the rats.
As for the high level complex issue, you say you managed to run The Maze in two Dominixes, and while it is good to know it is still possible, it is clearly a bad mechanic if two Dominixes is the only way to do it outside of bringing a dozen people to run it.
CCP FoxFour wrote:Null sec ganks of people running PvE content. This does have an effect on that no doubt. To be honest yes this means you will no longer be able to do this solo in a stealth bomber. I however just tested it and was able to tank six frigate NPC in my nemesis long enough for another character to jump into the system and warp 73au. I might be wrong but with the amount of EWAR that comes from frigates, and their hatred of drones, most people usually shoot them first when running these. The cruisers and BS never even looked at my Nemesis while I ganked the Raven. I also made sure the Raven was only running local tank so as not to generate any extra threat. If you want to be able to gank these guys solo, then yes it is going to mean you will need to bring something bigger. If there are a lot of frigate NPC on the field, well that will be difficult. We have accepted that as OK. Content Designer | Team Five 0 @regnerBA |
|
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
480
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:12:00 -
[837] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Adigard wrote:Rommiee wrote:darkness 4 wrote:Running anoms and lvl 5 missions should also be checked using subcaps with fighters assigned from a carrier that's sitting at a safe. This Sadly we'll probably have to wait until the server's come back up (someday we hope?) else the answer may be something akin to: "We ran the first room of the Score, L4, in a Tengu with fighter assistance. It was fairly easy, but we lost two fighters to rat aggro. We're okay with this." Wait, so fighters are required in a L4 mission now? No, I am not testing that. Please stop. If you honestly have a mission or anomaly or something like that you want me to test please let me know and I will.
I was not referring to Level 4 Missions.
Please can you check anomalies like Forsaken Hubs which are frequently run with a subcap and fighter support..
Thanks |
Maz3r Rakum
The Imperial Fedaykin
42
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:12:00 -
[838] - Quote
CCP FoxFour wrote:Null sec ganks of people running PvE content. This does have an effect on that no doubt. To be honest yes this means you will no longer be able to do this solo in a stealth bomber. I however just tested it and was able to tank six frigate NPC in my nemesis long enough for another character to jump into the system and warp 73au. I might be wrong but with the amount of EWAR that comes from frigates, and their hatred of drones, most people usually shoot them first when running these. The cruisers and BS never even looked at my Nemesis while I ganked the Raven. I also made sure the Raven was only running local tank so as not to generate any extra threat. If you want to be able to gank these guys solo, then yes it is going to mean you will need to bring something bigger. If there are a lot of frigate NPC on the field, well that will be difficult. We have accepted that as OK.
Lets say a ganker appears and attacks the initial ratter. Wouldn't it make sense that the NPC would not aggro the ganker as he is attacking what they were already attacking?
Your intention is to make the rats smarter isn't it? Making them switch to the ganker would effectively not accomplish your goal. |
Zagdul
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
1018
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:24:00 -
[839] - Quote
@CCP Foxfour
Have you considered scaling loot for the need for more people in high end DED plex sites?
For example, the Maze and it's massive missile launcher requires a specific setup ship that can tank that thing as if you use low buffered cruisers, you get pretty much 1 shot due to the webs.Considering we'll need to bring more due to the change in the AI, please consider encouraging more people to work together.
This is kind of a two part question:
1. Has the Maze been tested so that we can still run a 'tank' in it? 2. Can some loot scaling be added so that everyone gets an overseers artifact or something? Dual Pane idea: Click!
CCP Please Implement |
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
12
|
Posted - 2012.10.04 12:28:00 -
[840] - Quote
Maz3r Rakum wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Null sec ganks of people running PvE content. This does have an effect on that no doubt. To be honest yes this means you will no longer be able to do this solo in a stealth bomber. I however just tested it and was able to tank six frigate NPC in my nemesis long enough for another character to jump into the system and warp 73au. I might be wrong but with the amount of EWAR that comes from frigates, and their hatred of drones, most people usually shoot them first when running these. The cruisers and BS never even looked at my Nemesis while I ganked the Raven. I also made sure the Raven was only running local tank so as not to generate any extra threat. If you want to be able to gank these guys solo, then yes it is going to mean you will need to bring something bigger. If there are a lot of frigate NPC on the field, well that will be difficult. We have accepted that as OK. Lets say a ganker appears and attacks the initial ratter. Wouldn't it make sense that the NPC would not aggro the ganker as he is attacking what they were already attacking? Your intention is to make the rats smarter isn't it? Making them switch to the ganker would effectively not accomplish your goal.
Already answered that in the other post, but since this is the original discussion thread...
Do your typical player rats (aka 0.0 sov holder) refrain from killing you when you - uninvited - assist them vs. an opponent in 'their' territory or would they simply shoot both of you? NBSI policy ringing a bell? |
|
|
|
|
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 |