| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tachy
   |
Posted - 2006.05.13 09:04:00 -
[31]
Please tell us how you avoid the effects of automagically shuffling targets?
--*=*=*--
Megadon
CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
Tristan
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 11:04:00 -
[32]
didnt it used to be that you could shoot gang mates? as if they where in your corp??
im sure it did... and it was changed to how it is now cause people kept ganging people, just to then blow them up...
whiskey + memory = bad.
|
Obmud
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 11:26:00 -
[33]
Thread. Signed.
And to those "advices" from the others what to do and not, it is a real mess right now just as the thread opener stated. It makes it completely impossible for me to be in any supporter role than with a corp member, and even there i'm in danger to be shot down since the Radar is stupid as 2 kilo of stones.
It's very very frustrating if you get restricted by the game mechanics in your role that way, but again, support is not reimbursing anything, so... we just don't do it. Thats a solution as well. Just not be a supporter :/ yeah. Whatever.
-----------------------
This signature got altered because it was way to sexy and uber. If you want to know why don't ask. We're still horny. |
Snake Jankins
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 11:34:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Snake Jankins on 13/05/2006 11:35:25
 Originally by: Bohoba
Ya this is one thing they could work on
a gang member should be treated as a corp member while in gang.
That would be nice
Who's corp ? The gang leader's corp ? Not so easy, because of war deccs.
What about if the gang leader changes or the gets a connection loss and there is no gang leader. What if someone grabs leadership and you become a war target by that ?
I'm only trying to point out that it's not that easy.
___________
'Only ships can be assembled, this is a Frigate.' |
Trek
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 11:47:00 -
[35]
I agree with the OP, there are lots of dangers in flying support!
Yet another problem is the lock-back others might have active. There should be some sort of "friendly" lock that don't trigger the lock-back that one can use for support-modules. Yes the lock-back can be turned off, but not everyone has!
Or, why the need to lock at all? Perhaps the possibility to select someone in the gang-list and immideatley activate a friendly module on them.
---
My other ship is a Reaper
|
Miss Overlord
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 11:47:00 -
[36]
this thread just went totally off tangent. Yeah rethoughts all round i think
|
Millsy1
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 12:12:00 -
[37]
Ok wtf.
Why is it when someone points out an obvious point where CCP needs to improve something, someone goes "OMG you have to limit yourself and do this"
I don't WANT to just go pure support. Hell, there is no excuse for such a poor system.
And "too short to be effective?" give me a break.
I kept a Raven alive vs a Navy Issue Megathron. He had to get rid of me before he could kill the Raven, that's a hell of an effective tank.
The whole POINT of EVE is that you can do what you want. That's suppose to be the draw.
It's a very poor interface for trying to help friend’s. If you are targeting an enemy and a friendly, you can select the enemy ship, then go to select what weapon you want, and JUST as you click that weapon module, the enemy ship is blown up. So you will at LEAST get one volley sent to a friendly ship.
There is no excuse for a system like that. NONE. Any programmer or interface designer can see that "support" was obviously something they added as a 2nd thought, there was no planning for it initially, and they have not modified the interface since.
No amount of "skill" will help you deal with a server hicup, or lag. And can you really expect me to believe that if you were running a ship like that, and the ship you were looking to shoot at got blown up, you or a computer would go "OK, Aim and fire at the next target, no matter who it happens to be!"
|
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 12:27:00 -
[38]
The sad part is that they changed the interface twice since the support modules have been implemented. Radar -> Overview (awful version) -> Overview (fubar version)
--*=*=*--
Megadon
CCP wanted a well known artist and celebrity to test the new font so it's approval would be well known. They got Ray |
Smagd
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 15:37:00 -
[39]
Sigma,
I've become more paranoid about using support for non-corp members than about war targets, which can't be right.
In low sec it's not so bad, and if you're supporting corp members it's not so bad either, but I know logistics pilots who don't put ANY aggressive modules on their coveted Logistics Cruisers in empire and I can see why.
Of course, I prefer doing my logistics work in battleships for some backup armor and firepower, and then I double-check what module I activate on friendlies, and I ALSO double-check I don't activate an aggressive module on something that could pop in the next 0.1 seconds.
Also, just don't use F.O.F.s in missions. Have you tried firing F.O.Fs after sending a remote repair drone after a friend recently? It may be fixed now, but it used to be the F.O.Fs would happily consider anything the support drone targets a foes.
One relatively safe way to provide moderate support is to lock a friendly, set the support drones on him, then UNLOCK again - the support drones will keep going. Doesn't really do a LOT of support compared to large remote boosters or reppers, but everything helps, right?
We need a Drone Zen Master.
Smagd
PS: Also don't abandon your drones in space, they'll turn rogue and harass miners
--
When I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally. |
Rybold Rhee
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 16:03:00 -
[40]
How about they just fit a 'green target' button that allows targeting but no agressive actions on that target? With a totally different icon to the target crosshairs (pair of huggy hands maybe :P) and make it mutually exclusive with agressive target. Call it monitor, maybe, or something like that. I guess it could even shade out weapons when you are on that target perhaps?
|
Minerva Richie
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 16:10:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Rybold Rhee
How about they just fit a 'green target' button that allows targeting but no agressive actions on that target? With a totally different icon to the target crosshairs (pair of huggy hands maybe :P) and make it mutually exclusive with agressive target. Call it monitor, maybe, or something like that. I guess it could even shade out weapons when you are on that target perhaps?
Sensible suggestion. Needs thrashing out, but the overall idea is there.
|
Kordesh
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 16:16:00 -
[42]
Quote:
Ya this is one thing they could work on
a gang member should be treated as a corp member while in gang.
I don't know about that. I forsee something like this happeneing if that's how it worked.
Dude: Hey wanna gang!
Guy: Sure!
*join*
*Dudes friends warp in*
Guy: Hello! (=
*Horrible things that will not be mentioned happening to Guy's ship/pod*
Guy: Pwned Nubcakes LOLZER!
-------------------------------------------
"What's it like being a turtle?"
"It's a lot like being a walking house that eats lettuce."
(Hurray temp sig!) |
Kerr AVON
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 16:34:00 -
[43]
Whilst in my previous corp, I was in a gang consisting of corpmates and alliance members. We were in high sec space doing a level 4 extravaganza mission. I was flying support in an Oneiros with no offensive modules. Unfortunately one of the alliance guys didn't remove his lock-back targeting, and managed to shoot me. Concord appeared, destroyed his ship, and then proceeded to destroy my ship (as I had assisted him when he shot me  ).
I got the Oneiros and lost modules back after a petition of course... I don't think he even attempted to send a petition though, assuming he'd get knocked back.
An ability to have some kind of 'defensive' lock, whereby only certain modules could be used on that target, and that would also negate an auto-lockback would be a good idea to stop this sort of thing happening.
_____________________
Questions are a burden to others; answers a prison for oneself
(combat) Your 250mm Railgun II perfectly strikes Guardian Captain, wrecking for 855.5 damage.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 16:45:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Entirely possible, because huge numbers of support pilots manage to not shoot up their buddies.
There are not huge numbers of support pilots because of the issues surrounding support.
"The Human eye is a marvelous device, with a very little effort it can overlook all but the most glaring injustice" - Quellchrist Falconer |
Loviza
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 15:01:00 -
[45]
Deserves a bump imo.
|
Crumplecorn
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 15:12:00 -
[46]
Agreed with completely.
Two things could be done (I'd like to see both personally):
Add two types of targeting, modules won't work on the wrong type.
Gangs are FFA, which is handy for sparring too.
----------
Sorry but that link contains nawty language. -wystler
"Discussing moderation is not allowed" - Ivan K
"Ranting is prohibited" - Teblin
|
Deja Thoris
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 15:15:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Entirely possible, because huge numbers of support pilots manage to not shoot up their buddies.
There are not huge numbers of support pilots because of the issues surrounding support.
Agrees with Maya
|
Max Kentarii
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 16:59:00 -
[48]
Some "solutions" perhaps:
A)
If a target dissappears and you have more targets locked, the system will automatically select next target in queue (friend or foe) unless you've already selected one.
If they remove this auto-select feature, then you will get a message that the target doesnt exist anymore (or something along that line) and you have to manually select a new target before you can do any actions, be it friendly or hostile (keyboard shortcuts for closest target, tagged target, next/prev target etc would also be useful).
B)
Add two targetting queues.
Queue 1: Corp, gang, alliance
Queue 2: Everything/one else
If you select something in queue 2 and target dissappears, next selected target will be in same queue.
C)
Allow gang members to attack eachother without consequences or add a big fat red "panic" button that the person being "attacked" can press to call for concord assistance 
But first... fix the drone aggression, that will solve one of the big drone annoyances.
-----
I woke up on the wrong side of the galaxy today... |
Rorix Whitecloud
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 17:09:00 -
[49]
Yeaaaaaah... Signed. :) The 2ndary support targeting idea is really great, and i would love to see that implemented.
Originally by: Max Kentarii
Some "solutions" perhaps:
C)
Allow gang members to attack eachother without consequences or add a big fat red "panic" button that the person being "attacked" can press to call for concord assistance
But first... fix the drone aggression, that will solve one of the big drone annoyances.
LOL helarity XD could still be abused tho :P
~I don't remember. That's the second thing they teach you. |
Loviza
|
Posted - 2006.05.18 22:02:00 -
[50]
I wonder if we could get a reassuring response from CCP, I know we support people probably are in minority.... well we are in minroty, but it would be nice to know if our kind has any future in this game or if they intend to skip it as they seem to have. Ignoring the teamwork effects that are supposed to hold up a great game as this. Without support this is nothing more then a clickfest of shoot 'em up when considering the combat aspects.
So can we get some response CCP?
|
Loviza
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 06:27:00 -
[51]
So much constructive comments in here. This thread made me realise theres even more problems then I thought there was at first.
The only way of thinking I cant agree to is if it is free to shoot whoever you want in a gang so to speak. Cant have gangs totally free. The new players would get griefed 24/7 by idiot wannabe pirate players in safespace.
Im not gonna give up. I want to be heard, because I, just as I know many of you guys in this thread, really like being a support pilot.
Ive said some pretty harsh words about CCP lately and its deserved, but overall this is a great game and well worth fighting for the way you, me (and CCP) intended it to be played.
|
Bland Inquisitor
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 06:33:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Loviza
Im an avid fan of supporting in this game, I have especially designed Geddons to really help out my friends on missions. With the recent upgraded drones in the game I was soooooo happy, this would help me help my friends even more.
Ok, first of all, just supporting at all is risky, having your friends targeted (non corp members especially) is like a risky business as it is. I always have security on tho so I get a warning when I press wrong.
Support ships usually need to be loaded with non weapons and often you need to make a huge sacrifice in resistances aswell to be able to support properly. Makes it even more risky to go support.
Added to this comes the new repair/shield drones. These are the real killers especially in hi sec space, where the dreaded CONCORD operate. Why you may ask?
1. To use a repair/shield drone you need to use the engage button. This is considered hostile. You can press yes tho and they go repair. Its ok, CONCORD wont *****you just yet.
2. Even if you havent checked the box that you dont want any more hostile message warnings the game dont give a **** about it.
3. So, next time youre accidently put that jammer/weapon/webber/drone on a friend you never get a warning.
This happens to easy for one going support, since we have our friends targeted most of the time. Ok, no problem you may say, because this is a known bug and CCP would reimburse you if you lost a ship this way.
Nope, they dont, because all they see in their logs is the fact you shoot/webbed/jammed/droned another ship and CONCORD reacted accordingly.
To be fair this is the first real bad side Ive seen in CCP. I was honestly happily surprised to see a corporation being so open and friendly to their community. Sadly this Lying crashes that fascade. This brings them back to a normal level of a MMO company.
Most of all I DONT WANT TO BE ONE BUTTON AWAY FROM GETTING MY SHIP BLOWN TO PIECES!
Secondly you CCP should face your problem like youve done in the past and actually reimburse until youve fixed the problem!
Just my thoughts and I know Im not the only one, but I can easily say Im in minority, since Ive never heard of anyone else going support the way Ive done unless youre in a big Alliance doing fleetbatles often.
I agree with you and j0rz says hi :)
Been Playing EVE 6 Months And No One Pimped My Sig :(
Lost Dawn Technologies Is Recruiting :D
|
spiderbaby
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 06:53:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Rybold Rhee
How about they just fit a 'green target' button that allows targeting but no agressive actions on that target? With a totally different icon to the target crosshairs (pair of huggy hands maybe :P) and make it mutually exclusive with agressive target. Call it monitor, maybe, or something like that. I guess it could even shade out weapons when you are on that target perhaps?
I like that idea a lot.
Current system is a disaster and really hampers tactics and group operations. CCP need to change it.
|
spiderbaby
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 06:55:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Crumplecorn
Gangs are FFA, which is handy for sparring too.
Can't do that due to the possibility of abuse by unscrupulous types, as mentioned already several times in this thread.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 08:16:00 -
[55]
You also need to consider the following situation in any potential "fix".
Pirate locks you, pirate activates support modules/logistics drones on you, pirate blows you away. This is indistinguishable in the logs from what happened to you. Computers can't calculate intent.
|
R3dSh1ft
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 09:08:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
You also need to consider the following situation in any potential "fix".
Pirate locks you, pirate activates support modules/logistics drones on you, pirate blows you away. This is indistinguishable in the logs from what happened to you. Computers can't calculate intent.
Except that the op is the one doing the support, not being supported. If the one doing the support petitions, it is obviously in good faith.
I can vouch for the suckyness of the system atm. Was in a small gang with drones out (couple of offensive and a couple remote reppers) with a friendly frig locked and and enemy. When the enemy popped, my offensive drones took it upon themselves to pop my gang mate... WTF?
Did the guy get reimbursed? What do you think?
______________________________________
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2006.05.19 09:23:00 -
[57]
Originally by: R3dSh1ft
Originally by: Joerd Toastius
You also need to consider the following situation in any potential "fix".
Pirate locks you, pirate activates support modules/logistics drones on you, pirate blows you away. This is indistinguishable in the logs from what happened to you. Computers can't calculate intent.
Except that the op is the one doing the support, not being supported. If the one doing the support petitions, it is obviously in good faith.
I can vouch for the suckyness of the system atm. Was in a small gang with drones out (couple of offensive and a couple remote reppers) with a friendly frig locked and and enemy. When the enemy popped, my offensive drones took it upon themselves to pop my gang mate... WTF?
Did the guy get reimbursed? What do you think?
What the OP seems to be suggesting is that if he is performing support on another ship and activates a hostile module on it, either CONCORD should leave him alone or he should get reimbursed when CONCORD whack him. Both of these lead to a straightforward "quasi-exploit" by gankers. For example, suicide ravens with a small remote rep in one of their highs. "But I was repairing that hauler, I just hit all my missile launch buttons simultaneously by accident..."
|
Loviza
|
Posted - 2006.05.20 01:44:00 -
[58]
I like the idea of having a separate targeting system for support. One that lets you so to speak Target-for-support-only kinda button. Which should be noticed by the one being targeted and also should make it impossible to use any hostile modules on that ship unless you retarget it with a regular lock on. Should be bulletproof against abuse or?
|
LUGAL MOP'N'GLO
|
Posted - 2006.05.20 05:03:00 -
[59]
Why not make a tier 2 gang that requires you to type in a code and warns you that any ship in a gang is free to attack you.
So if you had this 'upgraded' gang, you could all attack eachother without concord intervention. Likewise, if someone were to scam you and to blow you up there would be consequences. An 'accidental' kill would result in the detention of the individual for X amount of time at the nearest station. In addition, the 'accidental' aggressor would have to pay for the price of the ship as well as the fitted modules.
I have no sig, because I can't compress my picture down that far. It looks like crapola. |
Loviza
|
Posted - 2006.05.21 18:16:00 -
[60]
Last bump I swear, but seems like we have covered many creative parts and ventilated our frustration. Now we can only pray theres one at CCP who discover it and actually makes sure it will get fixed.
*cross fingers*
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |