EVE Search - New drones, modules and what not

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 42 post(s)
craptacular Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2005.11.01 17:03:00 - [1] Quote: Drones take up a lot of resources so we would much rather see less drones but have them better instead. Cutting drone count by 1/3 is best described as a kludge. Why don't you try to remove some bloat first? Drones are subject to collision detection vs environement, ships and other drones (hence, i guess, the reason why they get into matting season each time they're out). Superfluous, a major cpu cycle sink and annoyance. Drones don't behave as a swarm/squad, each one picking its own target using dubious criterions (Oh! A structure! Hug hug hug!). With the current interface, it makes no sense to have more than one target. Superfluous, a major cpu cycle sink and annoyance. I, for one, would like to see less kludging and more fixing. PS: 5 beefed up drones < 15 regulars in terms of survivability when you factor in max lock count, lock times, module cycles etc... but it has already been said.
craptacular	Posted - 2005.11.02 02:11:00 - [2] Originally by: j0sephine Auto-lock back in the client settings allows you to simultaneously lock on up to 7-9 drones or so Auto-lock + Empire = Concordokken.
craptacular Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2005.11.02 02:11:00 - [3] Originally by: j0sephine Auto-lock back in the client settings allows you to simultaneously lock on up to 7-9 drones or so Auto-lock + Empire = Concordokken.
craptacular	Posted - 2005.11.02 08:51:00 - [4] Originally by: j0sephine Auto-lock + Empire + Stupidity = Concordokken. slaps forehead My bad. In the same line of thought, i guess using smartbombs at a gate in Jita is also an option.
craptacular Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2005.11.02 08:51:00 - [5] Originally by: j0sephine Auto-lock + Empire + Stupidity = Concordokken. slaps forehead My bad. In the same line of thought, i guess using smartbombs at a gate in Jita is also an option.
craptacular	Posted - 2005.11.02 10:38:00 - [6] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Sorry. but gotta agree with j0 here... if using autolock in Empire somehow mystically gets you killed by Concord, I think the problem is between the chair and the keyboard. Nothing mystical in there. A) When you enable auto-locking you release the control of what gets locked (and when), or put another lock slot attribution, to whatever fancy to target you. B) Auto-lock or not, you don't have an absolute control on which lock slot goes off, or when, either. A+B = race condition on module activation = Concordokken. Oops. So much for your proverbial prowness at selectively going F1...4 on proper targets.
craptacular Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2005.11.02 10:38:00 - [7] Originally by: Alex Harumichi Sorry. but gotta agree with j0 here... if using autolock in Empire somehow mystically gets you killed by Concord, I think the problem is between the chair and the keyboard. Nothing mystical in there. A) When you enable auto-locking you release the control of what gets locked (and when), or put another lock slot attribution, to whatever fancy to target you. B) Auto-lock or not, you don't have an absolute control on which lock slot goes off, or when, either. A+B = race condition on module activation = Concordokken. Oops. So much for your proverbial prowness at selectively going F1...4 on proper targets.
craptacular	Posted - 2005.11.02 11:08:00 - [8] Edited by: craptacular on 02/11/2005 11:08:49 Originally by: Theron Gyrow Isn't there a "You're about to fire on a non-legal target, you sure?" warning you can turn back on? Shouldn't that take care of the accidental concordokkenings? There is such popup warning, and it would be handy if it didn't trigger so many false positives as to be next to useless. Also, as Nafri noted, you'll get it in 0.0 and that's a sure hint about the reliability of that feature. Note: somewhere there's a bug report taking dust about it.
craptacular Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2005.11.02 11:08:00 - [9] Edited by: craptacular on 02/11/2005 11:08:49 Originally by: Theron Gyrow Isn't there a "You're about to fire on a non-legal target, you sure?" warning you can turn back on? Shouldn't that take care of the accidental concordokkenings? There is such popup warning, and it would be handy if it didn't trigger so many false positives as to be next to useless. Also, as Nafri noted, you'll get it in 0.0 and that's a sure hint about the reliability of that feature. Note: somewhere there's a bug report taking dust about it.

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.