Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
2685
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 16:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone. Team Five-0 has been working hard since Retribution to get changes for these two issues ready to go.
The good news is that we've got some changes implemented and they just need some more testing before release. We're opening the Duality test server up with both of these changes live and ready to go so that you all can take a look over the weekend and let us know if anything breaks for you.
Information on how to set up Duality can be found at: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Duality
You can use this thread for feedback and I'll collect it and get it to the rest of the team. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Veinnail
FinFleet Raiden.
47
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 17:06:00 -
[2] - Quote
looking forward to digging into this over the weekend. |
MainDrain
7th Deepari Defence Armada The Veyr Collective
24
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 17:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Team Five-0 has been working hard since Retribution to get changes for these two issues ready to go. The good news is that we've got some changes implemented and they just need some more testing before release. We're opening the Duality test server up with both of these changes live and ready to go so that you all can take a look over the weekend and let us know if anything breaks for you. Information on how to set up Duality can be found at: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/DualityYou can use this thread for feedback and I'll collect it and get it to the rest of the team.
Can you confirm the exact nature of the drone changes (the safety one is obvious) Im assuming you've worked so they no longer get hammered on launch, and the bug where if we dock them up, and launch them again they seem to get less aggression? |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
2685
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 17:13:00 -
[4] - Quote
MainDrain wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Team Five-0 has been working hard since Retribution to get changes for these two issues ready to go. The good news is that we've got some changes implemented and they just need some more testing before release. We're opening the Duality test server up with both of these changes live and ready to go so that you all can take a look over the weekend and let us know if anything breaks for you. Information on how to set up Duality can be found at: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/DualityYou can use this thread for feedback and I'll collect it and get it to the rest of the team. Can you confirm the exact nature of the drone changes (the safety one is obvious) Im assuming you've worked so they no longer get hammered on launch, and the bug where if we dock them up, and launch them again they seem to get less aggression?
Basically a new attribute has been added that scales NPC drone aggro in a more sensible way. There should be more reduction in aggro against small drones than against large ones in general. There's also a lot more room to tweak with this new attribute, as the old one often didn't work as expected.
The side effect where scooping and relaunching reduced aggro should be significantly less pronounced but may not be completely gone. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Siobhan MacLeary
BRG Corp Ocularis Inferno
44
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 17:18:00 -
[5] - Quote
I assume the way Sleepers act against drones - preferring to hit player ships but going after drones too if there's o |
Matthew97
Pro Synergy ARK.
88
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 17:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Siobhan MacLeary wrote:I assume the way Sleepers act against drones - preferring to hit player ships but going after drones too if there's o
I'm assuming that this only effects the new Mission AI as the sleepers haven't been touched AI Wise in the new expansion. |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
2686
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 18:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
Matthew97 wrote:Siobhan MacLeary wrote:I assume the way Sleepers act against drones - preferring to hit player ships but going after drones too if there's o I'm assuming that this only effects the new Mission AI as the sleepers haven't been touched AI Wise in the new expansion. CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Team Five-0 has been working hard since Retribution to get changes for these two issues ready to go. The good news is that we've got some changes implemented and they just need some more testing before release. We're opening the Duality test server up with both of these changes live and ready to go so that you all can take a look over the weekend and let us know if anything breaks for you. Information on how to set up Duality can be found at: http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/DualityYou can use this thread for feedback and I'll collect it and get it to the rest of the team. Is this on there now or soon? Just that its still got the old bugs from way way in Retri testing (Green lights on Tengu / Pure white ships)
They should be on there now. Duality may have other bugs here and there, we asked for it to be opened up with somewhat late notice. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie |
|
Aukido
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 18:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
What about full room aggo bug in L4 missions? |
Sarmatiko
798
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 19:09:00 -
[9] - Quote
Diff with full list of affected NPC ships (and one poor Dual Giga Modal Laser): http://pastebin.com/hRzpMKWe
Attributes description: AI_TankingModifierDrone - "Tanking modifier applied to drones. 1.0 is no modifier" AI_IgnoreDronesBelowSignatureRadius - "NPC'S with this attribute wont shoot drones with signature radius less than this value"
So, if I understand new changes correctly, NPC frigates now will attack only small drones, [battle]cruisers only medium and small, battleships only heavies, sentries and fighters. "Tank modifier" thing needs to be explained though. Drones will deal less damage NPC will tank better against damage incoming from drones?
Aukido wrote:What about full room aggo bug in L4 missions? Dude, you missed patchnotes for Retribution 1.0.5.
|
Jame Jarl Retief
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
626
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 19:42:00 -
[10] - Quote
Yep, would love to know what the "Tanking Modifier" is meant to be. If it mean drone damage is cut from the "wrong" drone size? That is, using a medium (but ignored) drone to (slower) take out the target that you should be using a heavy (attackable) drone to (faster) take out will result in medium drone suffering a DPS penalty because it's the "wrong tool for the job"? I hope not, because otherwise I want to see a similar modifier when using large missiles to hit small NPC ships.
Hope I'm wrong about this. |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
483
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 19:49:00 -
[11] - Quote
Here is a concept.
You had 30 some odd pages of people screaming this was a disaster weeks before you rolled it out. I was one of them screaming the loudest and longest.
Weeks before Retribution went live You even warped into my of missions while I was on Duality. You opened up a private convo with me and I gave you both barrels about this incredibly bad decision to implement this.
Yet, you chose to listen to all the people that said "oh, this new game mechanic is awesome, it is just bad players". Those people have been proven to either be be very very wrong, or they were simply lying to you.
So who about this:
ROKLBACK THE CHANGES COMPLETELY, SPEND SEVERAL WEEKS HAVING MULTIPLE PEOPLE WITHIN CCP TEST THIS OVER MANY WEEKS, MANY MISSIONS, MANY PLEXES, AND IGNORE ANY COMMENTS FROM PLAYERS, AS MANY CANNOT BE TRUSTED.
Otherwise, we will repeat the same cycle repeat. People who hate mission runners will simply post "I tested it, and the changes are awesome. Running drones is too easy now." without even having logged onto Duality, and you will blithely roll out these modifications, regardless of if they solve anything or not.
And as for the canard "CCP does not have the resources to run hundreds of missions and plexes", when you are implementing a mechanic that has such far reaching implications for the game, you damn well should find the resources. You would NEVER roll something out that affected moon goo like ring mining with such a cavalier attitude, but it is OK to wipe out high sec mission runners.
But this suggestion will fall on deaf ears. It is human nature to discount facts that run counter to one's belief system, while giving credence to propaganda that reinforces those beliefs. You just have to follow any political race to witness that. |
Mund Richard
44
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 19:55:00 -
[12] - Quote
Sarmatiko wrote:AI_IgnoreDronesBelowSignatureRadius - "NPC'S with this attribute wont shoot drones with signature radius less than this value"
So, if I understand new changes correctly, NPC frigates now will attack only small drones, [battle]cruisers only medium and small, battleships only heavies, sentries and fighters. What if a drone is traveling at MWD speed, does that affect it?
Sarcasm can be like drugs. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
483
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:00:00 -
[13] - Quote
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:Yep, would love to know what the "Tanking Modifier" is meant to be. If it mean drone damage is cut from the "wrong" drone size? That is, using a medium (but ignored) drone to (slower) take out the target that you should be using a heavy (attackable) drone to (faster) take out will result in medium drone suffering a DPS penalty because it's the "wrong tool for the job"? I hope not, because otherwise I want to see a similar modifier when using large missiles to hit small NPC ships.
Hope I'm wrong about this.
You seriously believe CCP will answer? It took them 10 days to announce changes to this mess, and they have yet to acknowledge there was a problem in the first place.
The best part of this tanking modifier, if it is implemented as you described, is it is yet another major nerf to mission income. Imagine someone saying, "I used to take out a Serp cruiser in 10 seconds with my Ogre II's, but now it takes 20 seconds, and I am making maybe 60% per tick compared to what I did pre-Retribution". That is so easy for the null sec zealots to simply say "you are lying, my income is untouched", and there is no way for the mission runner to prove otherwise. |
Warde Guildencrantz
TunDraGon
389
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:23:00 -
[14] - Quote
the only real issue is the aggression NPCs have to drones and the annoyance of killing ratters in low security places. the former is being fixed and the latter may constitute some modifications to allow for it, however is not super necessary.
I dont see what the last couple of posts are insanely distraught and angry about.
Before you shun me for being a PvP guy, I do missions quite often on my alt. I also realize sometimes you have to modify to compensate for missions, not just fly the same thing you have been flying all the time and expect perfect performance. Thats what's happening right now. Yes, drones are getting aggressed too often, but thats just about all. No, you can't bring a friend in an untanked cruiser, because its nonsense that it was ever possible to do that originally. You need to be able to run a level 4 to run them, no shorcuts. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
601
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:27:00 -
[15] - Quote
Instead of questioning CCP's motives and such about the change, why not test it out first? When i logged on, there were 3 people online. It's great to cry and whine about CCP not doing anything, but then when they ask for help, you just go "oh, they're not going to listen anyways ..." then if nothing is changed, you'll gloat about being right.
If CCP actually wanted to leave things as they were, they wouldn't have pushed this to Duality to have people test it.
|
Sarmatiko
798
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:36:00 -
[16] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:The best part of this tanking modifier, if it is implemented as you described, is it is yet another major nerf to mission income. No one explained this attribute yet but you already jumped to conclusions and raging. You probably know that this modifier was introduced in Retribution with 0.5 value. Let's speculate and assume that right now NPC tank 50% weaker compared to pre-Retrubution unmodified "full tank" and now this will change to 30%. So tell me where is "major nerf"? Didn't you just asked to "ROLLBACK THE CHANGES COMPLETELY" or weaker tanking should stay?
|
Freighdee Katt
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
6
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 20:53:00 -
[17] - Quote
Jame Jarl Retief wrote:Yep, would love to know what the "Tanking Modifier" is meant to be. If it mean drone damage is cut from the "wrong" drone size? That is, using a medium (but ignored) drone to (slower) take out the target that you should be using a heavy (attackable) drone to (faster) take out will result in medium drone suffering a DPS penalty because it's the "wrong tool for the job"? I hope not, because otherwise I want to see a similar modifier when using large missiles to hit small NPC ships. Since this is a patch to address drones being wiped out by NPCs, it's just as likely that it is some sort of factor that nerfs NPC damage when shooting any target that is a drone. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
601
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 21:09:00 -
[18] - Quote
Ran a couple of missions to test things out a bit.
Level 2 with a vexor, T1 lights. The npcs switched to the drones as on TQ. 4 Turrets hitting and a TD weren't able to reclaim aggro. For the most part, the damage was light on the drones, but there were only 2 or 3 npcs hitting, plus the vexor has a drone hp bonus. Overall, I didn't see any difference in the drone hate. They were all frigs and cruisers, and would switch to the drones every once in awhile. It wasn't the 2 minute amount people claim with Sleepers.
Level 4 blockade in a rattlesnake. Killing the battleships, never had them switch to sentries. The cruisers eventually switched to the sentries, though damage is hard to say, because the rattlesnake has a drone hp bonus too. Recalling the sentries and relaunching them, the cruisers would switch back again quicker than the 2 minutes. When the drones got aggro, cruise missiles and a TP weren't enough to get aggro back.
From just limited testing, the hate might be slightly less, but it wasn't noticeable in just 2 short tests. There still doesn't appear to be a way to get the aggro back besides recalling your drones or letting it die. That seems to be the most important part, having some method to get aggro back to the ship and off the drones.
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
483
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 21:23:00 -
[19] - Quote
Sarmatiko wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:The best part of this tanking modifier, if it is implemented as you described, is it is yet another major nerf to mission income. No one explained this attribute yet but you already jumped to conclusions and raging. You probably know that this modifier was introduced in Retribution with 0.5 value. Let's speculate and assume that right now on TQ NPC tank is 50% weaker compared to pre-Retrubution unmodified "full tank" and this will change to 30%. So tell me where is "major nerf"? Didn't you just asked to "ROLLBACK THE CHANGES COMPLETELY" or weaker tanking should stay? ps: I dont see any nerfs to mission income. No one should generate ISK sitting afk on the mission, while drones kill all stuff.
Right...sure, no nerf to mission income. Yes, all those people that were screaming on the GD forums before CCP shut down the threads, they were imagining the hit to income.
I have to stop replying to troll posts. It is killing me. |
Sarmatiko
798
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 21:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:I have to stop replying to troll posts. It is killing me. I liked the part where you avoided talk about actual numbers and switched to primitive "everyone is trolling me". Very constructive. And I really understand now why CCP don't listen to emotional feedback from people like you.
|
|
jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
171
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:12:00 -
[21] - Quote
Since the new mission AI is just a variant of Sleeper AI (something which I have spent a fair amount of time dealing with), I have a guess as to what that variable everyone is getting so hot and bothered about is really doing. One of the factors that Sleepers take into account when selecting targets is how tanky the target is. If you fly into a Sleeper site with an undertanked ship that does a lot of damage, the Sleepers will generally try to wipe you off the field. If you have a lot of ships doing roughly the same DPS (or otherwise generating "threat") and one has less tank, that one will relatively reliably attract Sleeper aggro (usually when they get tired of trying to kill your logis).
So, my guess is that the "tanking multiplier" is just accounting for the mission AI making the same calculations for drones. Drones are naturally way less tanky than your ship but do a relatively large amount of damage/have a lot of "threat" for their miniscule tanks. Therefore, to stop their threat-to-tank ratio form becoming totally ridiculous and attracting perma-aggro (which I suspect is part of what's happening now), the new variable might be a generous multiplier that makes the AI "think" that the threat-to-tank ratio is a little closer to that of your average ship.
Also, if you guys want to make sure the AI hates you more than your drones, rep your drones or use ewar mods on the NPCs. If it's anything like sleeper AI, RR and EWAR generate a huge amount of threat.
EDIT: And as for the persistent safety, assuming no egregious flaws are found how soon can we expect that on TQ? All I want for xmas is my safety to say in the "everything in my optimal dies" position. |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
601
|
Posted - 2012.12.14 22:20:00 -
[22] - Quote
No matter how many times I mention that I've used EWAR, and it wasn't enough to get aggro back, people who haven't tried it keep telling me it's the way to go. I have no idea about RR, but I believe that might be a good way, since CCP said it worked for them, and made the afk drone boats the best option.
Unless they want to make a drone RR module that can go out 50km or so, most actual mission boats aren't going to use RR.
|
Louis deGuerre
The Dark Tribe Against ALL Authorities
612
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 00:12:00 -
[23] - Quote
Without reducing signature drones will die anyway when > 10km away and NPC decides to target them so explain to my why I should bother to test ?
I am perfectly serious. FIRE FRIENDSHIP TORPEDOES ! Louis's epic skill guide v1.1 |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
601
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 00:16:00 -
[24] - Quote
Louis deGuerre wrote:Without reducing signature drones will die anyway when > 10km away and NPC decides to target them so explain to my why I should bother to test ?
I am perfectly serious.
To test how often it happens? I really don't care if they target drones as long as there is a reliable way to get the aggro back beyond simply recalling the drones. Realistically, in a way that PVE ships would be fit for, like a TP, TD, whatever.
|
Jame Jarl Retief
Murientor Tribe Defiant Legacy
628
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 03:14:00 -
[25] - Quote
Briefly tested (sadly, didn't have time for anything serious), and results felt very inconclusive.
In one mission (L1), the frigs switched to drones (small) when I was flying a Tristan. It made it back alive, but was in structure, that's from 20km away from the ship. No Algos were available, so I didn't test it.
Then I ran a couple L2s in a Vexor. Nothing even looked at drones. In both cases, I had the most primitive fitting - active armor tank, cap-stable (so I could leave it AFK for 10 mins to see what happens).
In the last test, I had my Vexor and one remaining cruiser. I turned off my guns, and got aggro and deployed light drones, light ones, not mediums. They started breaking down the tank, very slowly. Took about 10-12 mins for them to do it (Hobgoblin IIs vs Angel cruiser, not a good match), and drones didn't get any aggro from what I saw (I kept seeing the enemy plinking at me with his turrets as I orbited around 1km away).
So, when it comes to a medium ship ignoring small drones, I guess it works. Small ships are still more than enough to take on and potentially take out small drones though. Like I said (first test), most frigs turned on them and nearly killed one, just sheer luck it made it back. As far as I can tell, problem of drone survival is still not solved, not even close. Too much "equal size" DPS in missions still so that drones are under serious threat.
And since we still can't see when they're being targeted, only when they actually start taking damage, it's a bit late by then.
Will need to test with EWAR (TP, damps, whatever) to see how that affects things, but didn't have the time tonight. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
486
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 03:20:00 -
[26] - Quote
Rengerel en Distel wrote:Louis deGuerre wrote:Without reducing signature drones will die anyway when > 10km away and NPC decides to target them so explain to my why I should bother to test ?
I am perfectly serious. To test how often it happens? I really don't care if they target drones as long as there is a reliable way to get the aggro back beyond simply recalling the drones. Realistically, in a way that PVE ships would be fit for, like a TP, TD, whatever.
Do you seriously think that many mission ships have the flexibility to give up a mid-slot for EWAR? That has been one of the worst fallacies posted by people trying to derail the reality for the vast majority of fits.
I run missions in either a passive shield tanked/speed tanked Ishtar or active armour tanked Proteus. I give up a mid-slot of the Ishtar, I have zero survivability in any heavy DPS mission. I give up a mid-slot in the Proteus, and I give up any chance at cap stability, meaning death or a lot of warp outs, or targeting NPC's at any distance.
And don't give me that crap "adapt or die". There is no amount of fit adaption that will allow either of those ships to survive.
I would also just love to see a many shield Mach runners are excited about giving up a mid-slot and still being survivable.
Bottom line, any mission runnner optimizes their fit for maximum survivability or maximizing income. Anything that forces an alteration reduces one or both of those objectives.
And then this becomes what this was always about: A PLANNED nerf to mission running income. It may even extend to be a PLANNED nerf to all PvE income, but I am unsure how much this newest travesty on Duality affects null sec plexes.
CCP never had the guts to say "we want to cut your PvE income in half, but we are leaving static sources like moon goo alone", but thought it could slip it in through the back door. |
John Henke
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 09:25:00 -
[27] - Quote
I just finished some missions with my CNR. I had no difficulties.
I used hobgoblin II and hammerhead II as drones and a TP and a heavy NOS as EWAR-modules.
In the following missions my drones haven't been aggroed by the NPC: Cargo Delivery (I didn'tblitz.), The Right Hand Of Zazzmatazz, Intercept The Saboteurs, The Damsel In Distress
The last three missions i did on TQ and i had to look after my drones more carefully, because they got aggro, as it was to be expected.
In Pirate Invasion the drones have been aggroed after some minutes (the hammerheads by cruisers, the hobgoblins by frigates). After a relaunch they didn't get aggro a second time. I was even able to pull back a hobgoblin, which seemed to have been webbed by one NPC-frigate.
In this mission on TQ my drones got more aggro and i lost a hobgoblin.
Afterall i think things get easier with this change. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
488
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 09:39:00 -
[28] - Quote
John Henke wrote:I just finished some missions with my CNR. I had no difficulties.
I used hobgoblin II and hammerhead II as drones and a TP and a heavy NOS as EWAR-modules.
In the following missions my drones haven't been aggroed by the NPC: Cargo Delivery (I didn'tblitz.), The Right Hand Of Zazzmatazz, Intercept The Saboteurs, The Damsel In Distress
The last three missions i did on TQ and i had to look after my drones more carefully, because they got aggro, as it was to be expected.
In Pirate Invasion the drones have been aggroed after some minutes (the hammerheads by cruisers, the hobgoblins by frigates). After a relaunch they didn't get aggro a second time. I was even able to pull back a hobgoblin, which seemed to have been webbed by one NPC-frigate.
In this mission on TQ my drones got more aggro and i lost a hobgoblin.
Afterall i think things get easier with this change.
Please provide the precise fit that you used. I can fly any subcap in the game, and what like to try to duplicate your results. What impact did this have on your ISK / tick?
|
Mund Richard
47
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 09:58:00 -
[29] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: I can fly any subcap in the game, and what like to try to duplicate your results. What impact did this have on your ISK / tick? Wait, now you are making a post I could also make myself? (almost)
Your examples with the Proteus (3 mids) and the shield mach (... because more lows than mids means PERFECT for shield tanking, there ain't no problem with armor tanking amIrite?) I felt head on, the Ishtar... well, I have no idea how I would fit it for a mission with a TP (only against hybrid gunners, active gist?).
Anyways, back on the CNR, it's pretty much perfect for the new drone AI: It needs (or at least usually has in most capable fittings) a target painter or two, and has the non-bonused highslots for a NOS (since you don't need it for drone range extenders for sentries anyways).
So I do take his word, that a ship that was just ideal with at least one of the cookie-cutter build for this new AI business. In fact, when I went against rats on a raven myself on TQ, I had barely any problems as well. Spare highslot and spare/defaultEWAR mid FTW! Sarcasm can be like drugs. |
Avalon Stormborn
The Evocati
12
|
Posted - 2012.12.15 10:21:00 -
[30] - Quote
Should just make it so drone ships have a role bonus where drones are safe, or atleast a lot less aggro chance, and that other ships that aren't drone based still have to manage their drones a bit better.
As it works now, a drone based ships are rendered pretty hopeless for missions, whereas normal ships can still rely on their guns to get the job done.
I don't know, I just want it fixed in a way that drone ships aren't gimped anymore. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |