EVE Search - Try our new hacking/archaeology sites!

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Try our new hacking/archaeology sites!

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 51 post(s)
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 34	Posted - 2013.05.22 17:54:00 - [1] - Quote Did run 3 low sec guristas relic sites: The containers still were on top of each other in each site. Loot was abysmal (little over 1m isk average). Hacking difficulty felt well balanced (125/30 on my site), about 70% success rate. Rat spawns are easy enough to run the sites in cov ops frig. The minigame still feels very random but there is at least a little bit of strategy involved now. The loot spewing i find still horrible. It's by far the least enjoyable part of the new sites. The symbols are too small, too many cans - it really gets ridiculous after hacking the 3rd or 4th container, tractor beam feels painfully slow, keeping an eye on local and dscan is very hard because you have to focus so much on the cans. I really wish you would reconsider this mechanic or use it for what it feels like: a punishment. Trust me you'll get a lot of flack for this come Odyssey because it really isn't fun. All in all i think these sites could be much more enjoyable if they were centered around the hacking game not the loot spewing. My idea would be to have in each hacking game not just a system core but also a node that leads one level deeper in the security system. So player can choose between hacking the core or consider to to take a risk and go deeper with remaining virus strenght to find even better loot. And then should this fail l
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 34	Posted - 2013.05.22 22:40:00 - [2] - Quote Killua Zoldyeck wrote: Johan Toralen wrote: Did run 3 low sec guristas relic sites: Rat spawns are easy enough to run the sites in cov ops frig. I'm not sure how can you take down a Cruiser with an unarmed Covert Ops? Care to share your fit/ship? You are right. I confused it with t1 frig.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 34	Posted - 2013.05.22 23:44:00 - [3] - Quote Guristas Data Fortress still has colission issues. I suspect the destroyed station prop is wrapped in a single concave collision hull which causes the problem. See pic for what i'm talking about: http://i.imgur.com/t3YXqj2.jpg I got from the site one Esoteric Process otherwise only worthless crap.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 34	Posted - 2013.05.23 01:44:00 - [4] - Quote Well to me it sounds tempting to do a couple wh sites when i find a lot of wh's anyway as a side product of exploration. In so far i'm not against the removal. Keep in mind sleepers still spawn when you fail the hacking so doing C5/C6 sites in a exploration frig is not gonna be an option for day trippers. As far as content goes arn't a couple more visitors for hunting down content too? Granted i don't know enough about life in WH's and all the repercusions. Perhaps a compromise can be found that everybody is happy with but then CCP doesn't seem to be in the mood for compromises lately...
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 34	Posted - 2013.05.23 02:28:00 - [5] - Quote Kalot Sakaar wrote: I hear you. And that seems to be the thought process perhaps? But who knows because CCP isn't really explaining what they are trying to accomplish in my opinion....but you know that after a bit everyone will have this mini-game completely mastered and posted in their wiki's. Then the chance of failing a site will drop to zilch and you don't have to worry about rats. And who cares if you do fail a hack. You can still get out before the rat gets you. Where is the risk? NOW.. fail a hack and your ship is suddenly instantly scrammed, webbed, neuted and you DIE right then and there.... ya, now that would be EVE and then it would be cool. I think you are overdramatizing a bit. Professions sites never were as profitable as running combat sites even in hisec (talk about risk/reward). The loot drop is so bad right now we can be happy if it reaches similar numbers to the old sites come Odyssey. In so far it's not unreasonable that the sites are less dangerous then combat sites. But still you make it sound like there is no risk at all which isn't true. It's so easy now to scan down the sites (if you cant scan down the ship). Explorers will be busy with the damn cans instead of checking dscan and local. Also last time i checked you can't run the sites cloaked (regarding your recommendation how to fix it). Quote: I mean I thought with this expansion we would be getting cool new stuff to explore, new space, new types of sites, new rats, new something. The whole wonder of exploration they were talking about. Instead they just took a pretty good system and introduced a mini-game completely divorced from the rest of EVE that nullifies the whole point of skilling up and getting better and taking risk for big reward. Overall too easy, too WOW, too meh No sir, not seeing this as a positive step. Got to agree with you on that one. Pretty underwhelmed so far with all the changes and new stuff. The Effects are nice and all but i was hoping for new stuff that is actualy enjoyable to do and to look for "between the stars".
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 13:03:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Soundwave wrote: [list=1] One of the things weGÇÖve been trying to do is make exploration an actual profession with its own ships, modules etc. Removing the NPCs were a part of that, but re-adding them as a failure mechanic doesnGÇÖt really fit. This sounds like a good idea on paper. What's problematic about the way it's implemented is that you have hurt all-in-one exploration, thereby limited the possibilities for explorers. Explorers now have to chose between doing profession sites or combat sites to run either efficiently, especialy below hisec. That's due to ban of T3 from 4/10 and the new mods taking up slots. For profession ships its gonna be necessary to fit the right rigs, some probe mods to run them efficiently, so no room for tank and dps. Combat exploration Ishtar has no room for probe mods, hacking rigs, has no bonusses anyway and can't fit cov cloak. Pilgrim is too weak and has no bonuses and extra slots aswell. So if you insist on the T3 ban you should consider a new ship class for all in one exploration. Could be a buffed Pilgrim with bonus to virus strenght and probing, two extra med slots for probe mods, one more low slot for better tank and a bit more cpu. Sounds pretty hardcore, eh? I guess it could be balanced by hardcoding that 4 of the midslots must be used for analyzers and probe mods and nothing else. (or how about these modules already being built in like a true exploration ship?) Or you make a new ship based on the Gnosis model in that fashion with the bpc's spawning in exploration sites. These ships would be quite expensive i suppose so risk/reward isnt hurt as much as running sites in frigs.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 13:12:00 - [7] - Quote Seth Asthereun wrote: why would you need a new ship when the actual covert ops can run those site just fine? They are cheap, cloaked and fast. If they remove the npc from those site there will be no reason to stick with another ship. You completely missed the point which is all-in-one exploration (profession sites+combat sites in the same ship).
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 13:30:00 - [8] - Quote Seth Asthereun wrote: you can use any ship atm with the new scanning modules ishtar, vagabond pilgrim..... will have no problem to do high sec exploration both combat and and data/relic. For harder sites there are the t3 Was thinking more about low sec. Sure you can fit the mods on every ship. But think about efficiency for a second. You end up with ships that can do everything but are good at nothing. And show me where you fit the new mods on an all in one exploration T3 or put hacking rigs on there.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 13:43:00 - [9] - Quote Seth Asthereun wrote: hacking rigs? really? CCP mentioned bonuses to virus strenghts so i would assume they will be a good addition to run profession sites efficiently. Quote: [Tengu, Esplorazione] Tengu Offensive - Accelerated Ejection Bay Tengu Propulsion - Fuel Catalyst Tengu Defensive - Adaptive Shielding Tengu Electronics - Emergent Locus Analyzer Tengu Engineering - Augmented Capacitor Reservoir 6x Heavy Missile Launcher II (Scourge Fury Heavy Missile) Sisters Expanded Probe Launcher Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner 2x Pith B-Type EM Ward Field Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Shield Boost Amplifier II Analyzer II 3x Caldari Navy Ballistic Control System 2x Medium Capacitor Control Circuit II Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II ok that is the one i use, i have in cargo codebreaker II, salvager II, sba, covert ops cloak and covert subsystem. and can easly run every 0.0 site from magneto to 10/10 That's not a all-in-one fit.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 14:14:00 - [10] - Quote Seth Asthereun wrote: Hacking sites are already easy without rigs So you want a ship with 6 mid slots, covert, and with bonus to drones? Exploration is already easy let's make it even easier. Refitting from time to time doesn't seem to be such a burden How can you say this? The hacking isn't even finished yet. Ther's probably gonna be some sites that will be more tricky as the sites right now. I lost a bunch of containers on sisi due to failing the hacking game aswell. Obviously the concept of efficiency is foreign to you. Also i'm talking about a ship like all-in-one Ishtar or Pilgrim that take the new changes and mechanics into account and you react by posting your pimped mission fit. How is that even relevant? People play Eve differently. Hard to grasp. Good for you that you can run 10/10 in your boat. I don't have access to non NPC stations in nullsec to switch fits and why would that even be considered normal for a true exploration ship? And i don't even talk about a boat that would be capable of soloing higher class combat sites unlike your ship so what's the problem? You don't like other people sniffing around on your turf in a cloaky ship, that's it, isn't it?
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 35	Posted - 2013.05.23 15:20:00 - [11] - Quote Seth Asthereun wrote: But as someone as written before "there shouldn't be a Single Correct Exploration Fit" and there souldn't be a "final" exploration ship that can do everything efficiently. That will just make exploration more easy than it already is And btw i probe in providence and low sec so there are already a lot of "other people sniffing around on you turf in a cloaky ship" the solution i come to was to specialize (as it should be in everything) not ask CCP a ship that allows me to do everything I feel that's just intellectualy dishonest approach. The ship doesn't do "everything efficiently". It does exploration reasonably efficiently. Like a mining ship does mining efficiently, like a battleship does missions efficiently, like a noctis does salvaging efficiently etc. The new changes create a dichotomy between two kinds of exploration. I don't see what's wrong with having an appropriate intermediate step between t1 frig (with virus and probe bonus) and cloaky t3 (which you cant use for half the combat sites in low sec anymore). Pilgrim isn't an approprite intermediate step because it lacks the bonuses of t1 and is a bit flimsy. Ishtar isn't appropriate intermediate step either because it has no cov cloak and lacks bonuses aswell.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 38	Posted - 2013.05.23 17:12:00 - [12] - Quote Salpun wrote: The new launcher update is taking for ever. Dito. In fact it's stuck without doing anything.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 39	Posted - 2013.05.23 19:48:00 - [13] - Quote 2 data sites in low sec: Loot a little better today. Got 2 decryptors and a esoteric bp on the first, 2 decryptors and a skillbook on the other. Not quite there yet compared to the old sites but getting closer. The crap loot needs to go. Almost ran out of cargo space in the middle of looting and most if not all people gonna jettison it anyway. I rather grab empty cans. There is no sense of accomplishment from grabbing metal scraps too. So nothing of value to the gameplay lost if you remove it. In the sites: Containers still on top of each other. Still objects nearby to get stuck. I understand you want to make the sites look a little unique each but it really doesn't fly well with the loot spew mechanic. Loot spew is still more then plenty. You sure the number have been reduced? Its defo more then 12 cans. About 20 or more i would guess. it's really tedious. repeating myself here but i don't enjoy it at all. Haven't stopped the time but it feels like it takes longer then the old sites to wrap the site up.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 39	Posted - 2013.05.23 21:01:00 - [14] - Quote Nullsec Ruined Guristas Science Outpost: My virus strenght 125/30. Hacking game was hard but not too hard. Lost one of the containers to failing. Containers all on top of each other, bad fps due to the dust still being in there, npc spawns. Loot: 38.7m in salvage.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 40	Posted - 2013.05.23 21:36:00 - [15] - Quote I don't even know how the loot drops can be balanced properly. If they raise the drops then two explorers always will get the jackpot and share it among each other (which opens the door to abuse) wheras a solo explorer only gets it with luck. So the whole math that a solo explorer should get half on average what two explorers make running the sites together can't possibly work as promised. This mechanic is complete nonsense. Imo the sites take long enough with just the hacking game. Please remove the loot spew! Make it a mechanic for mining or whatever but please don't ruin exploration with it.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 41	Posted - 2013.05.23 23:39:00 - [16] - Quote M'aak'han wrote: I've liked exploration a lot until now, but I don't see myself going on with this activity unless the loot far outweights the excessive frustration of this spewing mechanism. Same. I don't see myself running these sites if it stays like this. With just the hacking game i'll be content with old loot drops and run them when i feel like it. With the loot spew intact the sites better have really, really good loot otherwise a fool who doesn't spent his time with combat sites instead as far as exploration goes.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 41	Posted - 2013.05.24 02:56:00 - [17] - Quote If you don't mind the grind more power to you. Personaly i think i will burn out very quickly running these sites. I do 2-3 sites on Sisi and can't stand looking at the cans anymore. Never felt like this about the old sites even tho they arn't that fun either. So the only thing that can motivate me to run the sites in their current form are good loot drops. Perhaps that could change if the hacking game is fleshed out more and gives awayy more of a feeling of adventure and finding cool new things. If not then i'll stick with combat sites for exploration and don't bother about profession sites anymore.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 43	Posted - 2013.05.24 11:35:00 - [18] - Quote CCP Bayesian wrote: Alvatore DiMarco, we could go one of two ways, distinguish Archaeology more from Hacking again so they are both unique or fold everything into Hacking. Hacking has more applicability as a transferable skill into more areas of EVE so we'll see as we broach where things are going to go more long term from here. This is inspired by Freyyas post: To make the new sites actualy about exploration and explorers working as a group if they want to: For data sites create 99 unique data discs. One of each spawns in every site with a chance to grab it. 33 in hisec, 33 in low sec, 33 in nullsec to involve explorers in all parts of the game. The discs are not traded on the market but players can trade them among each other or on contracts. Extra source of income for those who don't care, collectors items for thoese who just collect and don't mind exploration. When a player has collected all 99 an expedition pops up in his journal and the discs disappear from the inventory (so he can't create unlimited expeditions). This expedition comes in multiple stages which lead around the Eve universe. Each stage has more valuable loot then your average exploration sites. But the expedition can end on any stage. To reach the final one is a very rare occurence. But the reward is immense. A unique item for the explorer and a piece of lore revealed about a new technology (could be a mod or ship that will make it into one of the next patches or expansions). This is so rare that it will make Eve news and everybod can read about the name of the explorer. Say this should happen once a year. After that a new cycle begins with new data discs. The same idea can apply to the archeology sites, except players will find ship logs and in the final expedition the reward is a unique artifact from old times and a piece of lore from Eve's past is revealed to the world.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 44	Posted - 2013.05.24 12:21:00 - [19] - Quote CCP Bayesian how about a toned down version at least along the lines of combat site escalation? Like players can find artifact puzzles or data discs in nodes of the minigame. They are not tradable, could just be a cryptic message in the journal. Say once player stumpled upon 5 that belong together he's rewarded with an expedition to a system that he never visited before. (or random system should a player actualy have visited each and every k-space system). This should be much easier to implement but still provide some sense of exploration.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 44	Posted - 2013.05.24 13:07:00 - [20] - Quote A universe of opportunity to claim EVE Online's nineteenth free expansion, Odyssey, offers new tools for exploring the stars, challenges you to breach the unknown for adventure and rewards, and to face what lies on the other side. A re-imagined scanning system, intuitive navigation and new exploration modules will aid you as you search the heavens for your next conquest. Some will encounter sites never discovered before. There is now more among the stars, enticing even the most experienced veterans to explore.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 44	Posted - 2013.05.24 13:45:00 - [21] - Quote Alvatore DiMarco wrote: Would you like to play a difficult, supremely-challenging game while also trying to watch dscan in lowsec or hostile null? This is just my opinion of course, but the minigame as it is offers a decent balance between skill-dependent challenge (both trained skills and your skills as a human being) and being reasonably quick and easy to allow for surviving in hostile space. It wouldn't be a problem if the minigame was more challenging and a bit more time consuming to think about the right order of steps. You can still do it at your pace while checking local/dscan. The problematic part right now is the loot spew which requires your full attention and due to its tedious, repetitive nature will erode your attention to dscan even more.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 50	Posted - 2013.05.24 19:30:00 - [22] - Quote Talking about radial menu. That's another thing that makes the loot spew so crap as it constantly pops up for me when i try to get the tiny cans.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 53	Posted - 2013.05.24 20:57:00 - [23] - Quote Terrorfrodo wrote: Just tried a hacking site. I don't want to judge after one short test, but I did not have the impression that personal skill is required or useful. I just click nodes and then find the system core or I find lots of firewalls. I always left firewalls alone until all other routes were exhausted, to find repair mods and other utility nodes first. That's about the only tactical possibility I can see so far, however. Rest appears to be blind luck. Thers definitely some tactical aspect to how it's now in nullsec sites. For instance if you open an antivirus node you have to find tools first and destroy it before you can think of finding and hacking the core. Gets worse if you happen to open two antivirus nodes. The "bad nodes" also seem to be more prevalent on nodes that are surrounded by other nodes so look careful and find a way around the outskirts. at least that's my tactic for now. Quote: The loot release mechanic is not too bad. Yes, for the record, I don't hate the loot release mechanic :p If my impressions are correct, it is not as twitchy as it first appears, because you can only grab one can every few seconds anyway (you click "take" when it's in range, then your ship uses a kind of shiny tractor beam and pulls the can in). Fast-clicking several cans in rapid succession did not seem to speed up the process, though I could be wrong about that. All in all, collecting the loot requires a lot less fast reactions than doing pvp, so if you hate it so much, you're probably a goddamn carebear I think you just randomly clicked cans. They have names that indicate possible good loot or crap. So while one can gets tractored you're busy hovering over the others to find the next good one just in time. It gets unnerving when the camera moves around, you're stuck in geometry or your ship overshoots the cans. Forget about checking dscan while doing this. Quote: What still bothers me is that those sites are best done in a super-cheap frigate, so no incentive to hunt down explorers in low/null/wh. Why don't you make the analyzer modules a lot more expensive, so they at least provide some value. T1 analyzer should be around 10m and T2 30-40m each (if you really need only one on a ship). Easy targets with possibly juicy loot in the cargo. The cap rig and faction pos bpc's should go for quite a sum. At least until the market has adjusted to the supply.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 54	Posted - 2013.05.24 21:32:00 - [24] - Quote NPC's will be removed. But that sure would suck if you warped to a safe spot in the middle of running the site. Btw. can it be so that the containers despawn after been hacked? That would safe at least a hand full of clicks on these new sites.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 54	Posted - 2013.05.25 00:17:00 - [25] - Quote So i just did a data and a relic site in hisec. Got 5.8m decryptor from the data site and nothing of value from the relic site. In the relic site it so happend that the cans wern't in sync. Color change and name display was delayed and harder to grab the right can then normal. I guess lag. Tell you what this is really gonna **** me off when it happens on Tranquilty in a lowsec or nullsec site.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 56	Posted - 2013.05.25 13:33:00 - [26] - Quote Wasilah wrote: omg people can we stop with the posts saying get rid of the can spew? they are going to put it in, get over it. offer some idea on how to make it better/more manageable rather than just crying about it. It's not so hard to get a decent number of cans solo unless your working with a stick for a hand and you control your ship by smashing your face into the keyboard/mouse. Have you even read any thread regarding the loot spew? Ther's a ton of good ideas floating around for improvements. And don't tell us not to complain about a feature that we genuinely dislike. We are all paying customers (or contribute greatly to CCP's income stream via plexing multiple accounts). It's our good right to voice our opinion. Not to mention that we do unpaid QA work for CCP. A paid QA would be considered useless and fired if he thinks everthing is great and doesn't criticize. I can also tell you from my position being in game dev myself. We listen and consider critique even tho we often enough hate the whining masses. You can be sure even tho CCP will go through with this for Odyssey someone's scratching his head right now wondering if it was the right design choice and direction to take. This will be amplified in two weeks when the public outcry will start to pour in.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 56	Posted - 2013.05.25 15:12:00 - [27] - Quote Degin'eth wrote: I found a way to get the FULL LOOT from a site, but the total value is still VERY small. From a full loot in null sec (-0.3) the value was ~10 million. Incredibly small for the time it takes to jump through gates > scan the sites > find a site > hack it and loot it > transport the goods to a tradehub (especially hard in null). And this is on the test sever, where people are not actively searching for sites. So, the loot needs to be MUCH more valuable otherwise nobody will bother to do them.. waste of feature and expansion. Anyway, here's how you can get the full loot. 1) Use a cargo scanner on the hacking structure 2) See what kind of items drop. If it only drops data module (data cores, incognito process, etc). 3) When the cans are dispersed only loot the Data cans. Everything else will be scraps. 4) Repeat for the next structure 5) If the next one has salvage items, only loot Scraps cans and so on. So, the bottom line. You can do these sites solo, and get the full loot, but it's still worthless to do because of the value. Considering someone ratting can sit still, press F1, and instantly get their ISK, exploration should reward AT LEAST 50-100 mil / site. I don't think you need the cargo scan per se since the cans are named. On relic sites scoop material cans with priority, on data sites scoop data cans with priority. Don't know yet in which cans bpc's spawn tho. Your method seems like a good plan to prioritice which containers to hack first tho, especialy in hostile space. Agree with you about the loot reward. It needs to be in balance with risk. Profession sites in low sec/null need to pay better then 4/10's in hisec. bpc jackpots are a step in the right direction but it remains to be seen how common they are. For all we know they could be much rarer then 4/10 invuls.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 18:52:00 - [28] - Quote Naomi Hale wrote: Though chances are someone will come up with the perfect ship and fit within a day of release. Check out the force recon ships, especially Falcon. Has nice slot layout, cloaky, plenty cpu and power to fit to your liking. Under 200m isk. Pilgrim will lose its relevance for profession sites tho if rat removal stays.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 19:32:00 - [29] - Quote blink alt wrote: I like this idea. However, with the most recent increase in pain in the ass puzzles that are generated makes the role bonus on the t1 scanning frigates quite valuable. Having that extra +10 strength makes a world of difference on those 'difficult' puzzles. It would be nice if the t2 scanning frigates would get such a bonus. Having to comitt a mid to a cargo scanner to speed up completition time is quite annoying as well. Does make me wonder about the despawn mechanics for the sites. You can fit a memetic algoritm bank and a emission scope sharpener on the Falcon to help with the hacking. I get 135 virus coherence and 30 virus strenght with my skills at V. Plenty of medium slots for the new probe mods (no need for grav rigs and ship bonuses on that!). And still room for cargo scanner aswell!
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 21:52:00 - [30] - Quote Freyya wrote: Rigs need to be fixed, they currently do nothing afaik. Access difficulty bonus has no use anymore since it's not about the chance to open a container anymore. That bonus now needs to go towards strength or coherency. I get 10 points bonus to coherency from each rig (125 to 135). Just double checked it. Don't want to spread wrong information. I guess they haven't updated the desription yet. But the rigs work.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 22:25:00 - [31] - Quote Sites still despawn when you warp out. Not good. Hacking game was pretty hard on that hisec site. Defo too hard for exploration beginners. Tons of 70 firewalls and barely any tools.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 22:40:00 - [32] - Quote Quote: Sites have always despawned on warp-out. I wouldn't expect that to change. You sure? Maybe i confuse it with missions. Then the least they could do is to finaly remove the rat spawns so the sites can be done in flimsy boats. They want the dichotomy between profession and combat sites then they should be consequent about it so ships can be fittet accordingly without compromises. Quote: If the sites were easy enough for "beginners", all you'd get is crap loot that's not worth the time. Or if the loot was reasonably decent, you'd get them being farmed as much as the new system can be. That was a hisec site. It shouldn't be challenging for a skilled out character like mine with t2 analyzers and hacking rigs. I don't care about the loot in hisec. Was just testing it because i found it on my way. Didn't find anything in low and null today to test.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.26 22:57:00 - [33] - Quote Maybe it was just bad luck on that particular minigame with so many firewalls spawning. And couldn't test the other containers because i had to warp out (no tank and dps on my ship since i thought the rat spawns would be removed by now). A bit annoying that sites are so rare on Sisi. That's no way to test properly.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 63	Posted - 2013.05.27 00:18:00 - [34] - Quote Brooks Puuntai wrote: That is one issue that I have with the minigame. It has more to do with luck then strategy or skills. Mainly since everything is random from where the core is, to how many firewalls you run into, and what cache you find. When i tested the minigame a few days ago i thought they had hit the sweet spot already with the difficulty (talking about nullsec). Lost about 1 container per site. That's not too depressing. After a long search i finaly found a relic site in null just now and i lost 3 containers. The minigame is now too hard and completely based on random chance again. The containers that i managed to hack only was because i reached the core quickly by pure luck. The antivirus and firewalls spawn everywhere now. A few days ago it appeared that tools can be found mostly on the outskirts and firewalls/antivirus on the inner nodes. That added a nice element of strategy to the game. I knew if i had opened two antivirus i can still safe the container by finding a way on the outskirts and collect enough tools to beat the antivirus and hack the core eventualy. Maybe that wasn't how it actualy worked but pure luck again. After all the sample size for my tests isn't very big with so few sites spawning on Sisi. But even if not then please CCp look into this as a possibilty to actualy make a game out of the minigame that isn't completely based on randomness.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 65	Posted - 2013.05.27 12:46:00 - [35] - Quote CCP Soundwave wrote: I'm finding it a bit too easy atm across all tiers! The one I had the most difficulty with was tier 3 actually. How can literaly unsolvable minigames (which seems to happen now in about 50% of cases) be too easy? Or are you talking about something else? It's not really clear from your post.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 65	Posted - 2013.05.27 15:31:00 - [36] - Quote CCP Soundwave wrote: Johan Toralen wrote: CCP Soundwave wrote: I'm finding it a bit too easy atm across all tiers! The one I had the most difficulty with was tier 3 actually. How can literaly unsolvable minigames (which seems to happen now in about 50% of cases) be too easy? Or are you talking about something else? It's not really clear from your post. My failure rate across all tiers is less than 30%, with the highest being tier 3. If the answer to the game being "too easy" is to make it so hard that it's literaly impossible to solve in certain percentage of cases that's a bad approach imo. Say we are supposed to lose 50% of containers, then 50% of cans. Even if we win by what you devs consider adequate it always feels like losing and leaves a sour taste in the mouth. That's a pretty big design flaw in my opinion. I'm aware it's a tough challenge to balance the sites to make them hard but still feel fair and like accomplishing something. The answer to that can only be to make the minigame less random and more strategic. Must be possible to still hack a tough minigame by using the wits. The trade off is that you spent more time in the site as a sitting duck while figuring it out instead of just quickly clicking through the minigame because all the nodes are completely random anyway and doing it quickly makes no difference anyway. Not sure what else can be done to make the sites more challenging without adding rats. There doesn't seem to be much middle ground between the sites being no challenge/easy farmable and unfairly hard/frustrating right now. That said i don't think the sites really have to be super hard/challenging as a design goal. It's just one way to do PvE for income. Mining is easy, mission running is easy, 4/10 in hisec is easy, plexing+mission running in FW is easy. So why does the exploration mechanic have to be different. It's a challenge in itself to do it in hostile space without getting popped and get the loot back safely. The risk/reward could be balanced by giving players incentives to do the low and null sites in more expensive ships via bonuses. And perhaps some deadspace analyzers, being able to fit two t2 rigs on certain ships etc. Have players spent more isk beforehand to gain an edge on the sites.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 66	Posted - 2013.05.27 17:12:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Bayesian wrote: You guys seem confused. Even if a game is completable it doesn't mean Soundwave will always complete it so there will be a base failure rate. Looking at things statistically there will be an average rate of failure, otherwise by definition everyone will have succeeded. I'm not confused. The game right now is completely random. Click on the wrong nodes (which you can't avoid as its random) and you're screwed. You can't rebound when you've opened a bunch of antiviruses and the only way to continue with the game in hope to find some tools to destroy the antivirus is blocked by a firewall. This is now a standard scenario as these things spawn in large numbers and on every possible node. So to make this less random and to be able to consider it an actual game there need to be a ruleset on which kind of nodes antivirus, firewalls, tools and the core can be expected. For instance firewalls could be expected on the connecting node between two "blobs" of nodes, antivirus on surrounded nodes, tools on inward and outward pointing corner nodes, the core somewhere on the far side from the starting point, perhaps on a surrounded node aswell so you risk opening a antivirus. The element of strategy comes into play due to the randomly created play grid. You have to take a good look at it, plan your way to collect tools, avoid sourrounded nodes, find the way with the least probable number off firewalls to the other side of the grid. With such ruleset there will still probably some scenarios where the minigame isn't technicaly solvable due to the randomly created grid and other factors like your skills and tools used but at least you can use your brain cells to improve your success rate statistic. Which then in turn gives the player a sense of success and accomplishment.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 66	Posted - 2013.05.27 17:22:00 - [38] - Quote CCP Bayesian wrote: Johan Toralen, these sorts of rules exist. None of the network topology generation, the layout or the percentage chance of finding different types of node is completely random. Then better double check your code. It felt so last week, which was good. But yesterday the firewalls and antivirus were completely all over the place on the sites that i ran.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 66	Posted - 2013.05.27 22:51:00 - [39] - Quote Just did 3 low sec serpentis sites. The hacking difficulty was much easier then in the sites that i did yesterday. Only lost one container. The loot was underwhelming still. 2 decryptors from a data site, worth 11m. 7.5m and 10.5m from two relic sites. As i used a cargo scanner beforehand i can tell you that there was quite a bit of a discrepancy between what is in the sites and what i managed to get eventualy. 2 decryptors of i think 6 or 7. There was a bpc and two skillbooks in the last relic site (Decayed Serpentis Quarry) of which i got none. With 8 containers and the loot spew the chance to get the bpc is what like 30%? That just doesn't cut it. In the old site when there spawned a bpc in one of the cans you got it. End of story. But as i wrote in one of my earlier posts i don't even know how this can be balanced. If you put 3 bpc's in to give me as solo a reasonable chance to get one then a group of explorers can easily exploit the system and farm goodies en masse since for them it's not based on luck to get one but a certainty to get all. (or almost all, they can still lose a container to the hacking)
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 70	Posted - 2013.05.28 15:12:00 - [40] - Quote Kel hound wrote: 2) more an observation rather than a complaint but why do we need two separate modules for what are essentially the exact same thing? Both archeology and hacking have the same interface, the same mechanics and the same challenges, so why do we need to have 2 separate skills and 2 separate modules for the same task? wouldn't it make more sense to roll the functionality of both into the one skill and/or module? Good point. I think they should merge the analyzer into one. Nobody would complain. Frees up a slot also that could be useful for a new category of mods that boost virus strenght and coherence. For the two different rigs it could be made so that one boosts coherence and the other one strenght.
Johan Toralen Clockwork X3 81	Posted - 2013.06.03 23:14:00 - [41] - Quote Altrue wrote: I ran three sites. Made 16.3 mil. And only because of a "lucky" loot at 14.3. Confirmed that loot tables are very very UGLY. Thank the people who got a jackpot and bragged about it like it was the norm for them. And then bragged about getting 80% of cans solo. That said i actualy got a decent loot from a low sec data site today (some 3 run faction bpc). That was the first and only genuinely good loot drop that i had in all these weeks of testing since the new sites were introduced to Sisi. Other then that the average has been pretty miserable, defo below of what the same number of sites had given me on TQ with the old sites.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.