| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nash MacAllister
Anomalous Existence
Low-Class
215
   |
Posted - 2014.11.10 20:34:49 -
[61] - Quote
Winthorp wrote: Gas clouds in sites are pure ****, remove them.
If only 1 thing ever gets changed, please let it be this one...
Yes, if you have to ask yourself the question, just assume we are watching you...
|
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
134
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 21:05:38 -
[62] - Quote
Reading must be hard:
Quote:WORMHOLE!! PVE Little things
If you want to talk about your k-spacestuff go to your own forums and post there. Or in the feedback for science and industry it is still stickied everywhere.
Overall worth of sites is completely out of balance compared to pretty much everything else, but
RR used to work and was not a problem, maybe C4 sites are not supposed to be soloed. There are c1-3 sites for that.
Sleepers orbiting at 80, so what? You cannot bring blasterboats, not everything is supposed to be as easy as possible.
Offgid spawning is a thing that needs fixing, but it only regularly happened in one c4 site iirc. I just do not know which one exactly since I haven-¦t run c4s in years.
Dataloot being caldari decryptors and random useless junk has been like that for years, but 20+ cans are really not needed. If people running the sites could just post the name of the site plus the number of cans that would be probably helpful.
Things brought up during the meetings:
sentry guns being way to strong in all regards and not dropping loot.
Escalations spawning in easily exploitable positions (0 traversal and smarties)
Reduction of (lowend) gas volumes, since they are pretty much worthless and only cleared to have less sites to scan but take forever.
Addition of k-space druggassites to give industrialists more to do. Probably depending on the systemeffects. F.e. 80% of it being a bluepillsite in a pulsar or an exile in w-rs. Maybe introduction of new rare drugs in fields still missing some.
Drops of intact-wrecked-malfunctioned t3 destroyerhulls inverted to the ones of stratcruisers to differenciate further between classes. So if you want to produce destroyers you run lowend sites, for cruisers you get better results in highends. Ofc we do not know how t3 destroyers will work at all yet.
Changes to the way the different waves work to make them scale in difficulty. So it could be possible to only run the first wave with bad skills, but then salvage it and get some reward. With better skills/ships or more people you would be able to complete the site.
Escalation of sites to in-system-sites one class higher somewhat like k-space escalations. Would break the boredom of always the same sites and could help prepare people to move up the classes.
(Re-)Adjustment to ores in gravs. Someone pointed out it got changed a while back and is now not useable for production. Again, if some induguy had names and numbers that would probably be good.
Sleepercommanderspawns
Sleeperbubbles/-Hics |
Winthorp
2873
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 21:16:44 -
[63] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:corbexx wrote:MooMooDachshundCow wrote:WH sites should be hard because of DPS, neuts, etc. Not because your target spawned 150km off. It's frustrating and off-putting for some, and generally not a good mechanic IMHO. need to know which site this is in, the idea is to make it easy on CCP Affinity to sort it out not have to look through all the sites herself It happens in many C4 sites but is IMHO a total non-issue with MJDs and long-range weapons. Positioning is a nice welcome addition to site running and makes it less boring. Yeah, every little thing that requires user action makes them less grindy.
And this mechanic specifically forces people to use a very limited range of ships to do the site or run it completely inefficient. |
Niskin
League of the Lost
54
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 21:51:46 -
[64] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote:Reduction of (lowend) gas volumes, since they are pretty much worthless and only cleared to have less sites to scan but take forever.
I was hoping the introduction of T3 Destroyers would increase the demand for low end gas. I'm fine with the low market value, as they are easy to come by, but it would be nice if they actually sold. Either way, anything that tightens up the market for low end gas is a good thing. So +1 |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective
Unsettled.
224
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 21:58:31 -
[65] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:
And this mechanic specifically forces people to use a very limited range of ships to do the site or run it completely inefficient.
ABCs, T1 BS, CS, marauders, carriers are a "very limited range"?
There's already more options than for many other types of PVE.
|
MooMooDachshundCow
Incertae Sedis
125
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 22:20:26 -
[66] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:There's already more options than for many other types of PVE.
That's really impossible. If you're referring to C5/6 sites there is a very limited number of ship comps that can even survive the sites, to say nothing of doing so in an efficient way.
Which other types of PVE are you referring to? Mining? Since it's limited to barges that's the only more-limited PVE type that I can think of.
Null/low/missions can be run in literally anything.
Incursions are primarily limited by the strictness of the group running them.
Furthermore, I've never seen ABC's, CS or much of anything other than marauders running high-end WH anoms. This is because the other things require such large groups that the isk/hr is diluted to the point of ridiculousness.
What kind of PVE is more restrictive?
Also, note that C5/6 sites are almost only ran with capital escalations. Particularly since the changes to RR and such there has been a marked drop in site runners. Maybe the slight payout increase will help, but I don't see where your thinking comes from on this one. Please explain.
Yeah, well, it's just like my-áopinion, man.
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1955
|
Posted - 2014.11.10 22:27:57 -
[67] - Quote
I would like there to be solo content in all classes of wormhole. This could be achieved through changing data sites by reducing the number of sleepers. The difficulty sound still ramp up as you go up in class but all all the data sites would be able to be completed using a sub cap. The blue loot and salvage from the missing sleepers could be moved to cans.
This gives solo guys in high classes something to do in off peak times and it also gives day trippers and solo guys from low class, systems easier access to high value sites in c5/c6 space.
+1
|
Pro TIps
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
84
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:01:20 -
[68] - Quote
corbexx wrote:MooMooDachshundCow wrote:WH sites should be hard because of DPS, neuts, etc. Not because your target spawned 150km off. It's frustrating and off-putting for some, and generally not a good mechanic IMHO. need to know which site this is in, the idea is to make it easy on CCP Affinity to sort it out not have to look through all the sites herself
The Barracks site in C4 is a good example, but there are such spawns in several others including the data sigs.
Basically, the Sleepers spawn 100-150km away, and in the Barracks, they want to stay at that range. It is annoying because they start shooting their weapons, but they won't hit you from that distance. You have to cuss yourself for not having a SEBO, slow-boat there, MJD, do warp tricks, blablah.
It is just a time sink that doesn't add any fun or difficulty to the site. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Prolapse.
1865
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 02:07:56 -
[69] - Quote
corbexx wrote:MooMooDachshundCow wrote:WH sites should be hard because of DPS, neuts, etc. Not because your target spawned 150km off. It's frustrating and off-putting for some, and generally not a good mechanic IMHO.
Frontier barracks, in the C4.
See my video of doing it in the Enyos. Because we are, as I say, "up in their balls" instantly, when we kill wave 2, wave 3 is 150km away. The only saving grace is they burn towards us at 2km/s and we toward them at 2km/s, which makes it only about 45s of dead time. But try that in any non-Golem or cruise phoon setup and good luck not being bored. Or wasting 5 minutes.
C4 PVE is all about positioning and projecting max DPS out +100km. Or Enyo's in W-R, as above.
other Little Things;
- Warp at zero lands you up to 120km off cans in some radars (C2, C4, can't for the life of me remember doing C3 relic or data).
- Argos or whatever they are called these days, wakeful sentries or something - their sig radius is unfeasibly small. You literally cannot hit them with turrets some times.
- As above, drones cannot hit things in BH effect wormholes at times, due to orbiting the sentries too fast for the poor little drone tracking vs the unfeasibly small sentry signature radius. Means that Bouncer II's in C4 BH are worthless for taking sentries out.
- OMG the gas clouds. Seriously, I have a 1GB onboard ATI Radeon card, 3 years old, and my computer just dies inside when I scroll in. I haven't looked at my ship beyond seeing the white box of the bracket for THREE YEARS. These god damned gas nebulae are not even pretty - just a farty yellow plague on my machine and my ability to zoom in to see if a hapless Tengu is aligned anywhere in particular. And for what? Ambience?
- W-space relic and data sites. Hey, you know what, just remove the cans entirely, and put the hull sections into the sentries as loot drops, because ZOMG fuq hacking those cans. No one does below C5's, it's a worthless exercise in self-flagellation.
- Y U 80km from belt in some ore sites when miners warp in? Liek, we has to BM rock and warp off and back, just to be anywhere near the ore site. Thx for waste 5 minutes of my time.
- 5 sentries in a gas site. fuq dat.
J's before K's.
Prolapse. Turning holes inside out with pew pew.
http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc.
Illusion of Solitude
1356
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 09:14:07 -
[70] - Quote
Whilst not knowing the technical requirements, and whether it would be a little thing or something major, i'll put it in here anyway, please remove if it is unrealistic for this thread.
Daytrippers and those starting wormhole life would benefit from some sort of personal POS
Whilst that would be I imagine difficuilt, stripping it down to basics, what they might find valuable could be a place to change fittings, light storage, and able store a second ship, and have SOME security.
May I suggest a Mobile Depot with a small force field?
[u]_There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE _[/u]
|
|
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective
Unsettled.
224
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 12:49:19 -
[71] - Quote
MooMooDachshundCow wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:There's already more options than for many other types of PVE. That's really impossible. If you're referring to C5/6 sites there is a very limited number of ship comps that can even survive the sites, to say nothing of doing so in an efficient way.
I'm referring to C4 sites here, like most comments, I don't recall spawn ranges in C5 sites being a huge issue. In this short time I've been in C4s I've already tried solo marauding, CS+marauder, solo MJD Hyperion, RR Domis (3-4 guys), ABC fleet (5-6 guys) and all of these were perfectly efficient.
Quote:Which other types of PVE are you referring to? Mining? Since it's limited to barges that's the only more-limited PVE type that I can think of.
Null/low/missions can be run in literally anything.
Incursions are primarily limited by the strictness of the group running them.
Furthermore, I've never seen ABC's, CS or much of anything other than marauders running high-end WH anoms. This is because the other things require such large groups that the isk/hr is diluted to the point of ridiculousness.
What kind of PVE is more restrictive?
BS and marauders are most efficient in missions, exploration is almost solely done in Ishtars and Tengus, and gl trying for efficiency in Incursions without a pirate BS or T2 logi cruiser. I don't honestly see sleeper PVE more restrictive than these.
Quote:Also, note that C5/6 sites are almost only ran with capital escalations. Particularly since the changes to RR and such there has been a marked drop in site runners. Maybe the slight payout increase will help, but I don't see where your thinking comes from on this one. Please explain.
I don't see much wrong in C5/6 focusing on capital escalations, what is your point? I find it quite ok that there's subcap PVE in C4s and below, and cap escalations in above, something for everyone.
|
RudinV
Hard Knocks Inc.
Irresponsible Use of Capital.
454
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 13:23:07 -
[72] - Quote
Alliance bookmarks. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Reckoning Star Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 14:18:21 -
[73] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Winthorp wrote: Boost low end WH income (Your onto that one) Gas clouds in sites are pure ****, remove them. Bring back scanned sigs for Ore sites Spawn ranges in C4 sites force you into using certain ship types, change that. Change the distribution of the vital and instrumentals around so they spawn in low class WH's and not just C5/6 that also get the other gas sites. PI material and planet data is set to be at 0.0 space yet a WH pilot doing PI has no advanced warning (Local Chat) that he may be in danger and so he should get better PI with his extra risk then the nullsec PI user. Increase the pool of sites in C3 and C4. Fully implement your PVE changes list, SHIP IT. Make Data/relic sites worthwhile to run and not just for the blue loot and ribbons. Also should prob fix the being able to solo tank the first wave of C5 Data/Relics to straight away hack the cans... (I made some sweet ISK from that but is it right? Prob not) All of the above, except nerfing the C5 data relic ability to do first wave. This should be an option for all sites, balance them so the waves trigger on a tankable cruiser. This was proposed by Keith originally. Allows for people to play "up" a class when solo or small group of lower class residents away from the home system.
I'd agree with this. I do this C5 "cherry picking" frequently and it is dangerous as all f*ck to me running them solo. I spend easily 45 minutes to an hour in a site to clear the sleepers except the trigger and then hack the cans. Yes, there are more efficient methods but I use a very inexpensive fit and take the risk of time to reap the benefits of C5 level relic loot that I otherwise would have no access to. It is one of the most exciting PvE experiences I have had in EVE. I wish it could be done on more sites including those in C3 and C4 space. It not only is an income source for the tactical player but it also negatively impacts the local residents by me running a site that otherwise would be more lucrative to them.
|
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Reckoning Star Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 14:35:09 -
[74] - Quote
- Allow all gas sites (incl. low/null) to spawn in all classes of wormholes. Daytrippers and chain explorers often end up in wormhole classes far different than their "home" system. Just like you have the best ores across all wormhole space, spreading the gas types around will mean more accessible content in a variety of systems for a variety of player levels.
- Make ore anomalies into signatures again. Promotes mining. I know your numbers say the amount hasn't changed but that's likely simply because the people who want to mine ore will mine ore regardless but with renewed interest in wormhole space, making ore into signatures may bring some non-miners back into the activity
- Change data/relic sites so that the first wave is tankable by a solo player for "cherry picking" the sites. Specifically, remove the Battleship from wave 1 of the Forgotten Frontier Evacuation Center. It does not have the Argos gun so that would make wave 1 tankable. See below for additional.
- Change the can hacking mechanic on data/relic sites in C4 so that failed attempts do not spawn additional waves. See above. I know this happens in C4 sites, not sure about lower class. This prevents cherry picking which can be excellent content for a solo player similar to ninja gas mining, etc.
|
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
300
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 16:48:01 -
[75] - Quote
Make the cans in Data/relic sites explode if you screw up more than once. Just like k space.
Making it too easy to get the loot out has contributed to the rapid decline of their value, these days its not even worth your time to open them. I know several people that just spam trying to get it, and dont even bother trying to actually play the game because the chance of getting a easy shot to the system core is decently high enough.
The Wormhole Kid
Event Organizer of EVE New England
|
Niskin
League of the Lost
55
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 17:09:17 -
[76] - Quote
+1 to "Grav sites should be sigs, not anoms"
Also, currently it seems like Grav sites last about 24 hours once you warp to them. For me it would be beneficial if they lasted longer, like 48 hours. I don't want to keep sites open too long because they do need to go away so others get their spawns. Even 36 hours would be better than nothing. Then I could kick one open on a weeknight and get two full evenings out of it. Right now, if I get home at 6pm and open one it will close about the time I get home the next night. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Reckoning Star Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 17:11:02 -
[77] - Quote
ExookiZ wrote:Make the cans in Data/relic sites explode if you screw up more than once. Just like k space.
Making it too easy to get the loot out has contributed to the rapid decline of their value, these days its not even worth your time to open them. I know several people that just spam trying to get it, and dont even bother trying to actually play the game because the chance of getting a easy shot to the system core is decently high enough.
As someone who takes advantages of the unlimited tries, I'm fine with this as well. The fact that the new null data/relics in WHs exploded on 2nd failure is fine with me and as made me upgrade my rigs as well as my skills to compensate for failure rate. That is a good thing. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
1960
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 17:12:03 -
[78] - Quote
ExookiZ wrote: Make the cans in Data/relic sites explode if you screw up more than once. Just like k space.
Making it too easy to get the loot out has contributed to the rapid decline of their value, these days its not even worth your time to open them. I know several people that just spam trying to get it, and dont even bother trying to actually play the game because the chance of getting a easy shot to the system core is decently high enough.
Yeah but the hacking game is a ******* joke! It barely qualifies as a game... I hope it gets improved before the explosion mechanic is introduced to wormhole space.
+1
|
RudinV
Hard Knocks Inc.
Irresponsible Use of Capital.
454
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 17:12:47 -
[79] - Quote
Niskin wrote:+1 to "Grav sites should be sigs, not anoms"
Also, currently it seems like Grav sites last about 24 hours once you warp to them. . no, they last 72h.
|
Niskin
League of the Lost
56
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:10:13 -
[80] - Quote
RudinV wrote:no, they last 72h.
That may have been the case when they were sigs, but it doesn't seem like it is now. At least not in my experience. I've opened 2 of them in my C2 so far and neither one lasted more than a day. It's possible somebody else warped to them before I did though. If they are 72 hours then I'm fine with that. |
|
|
roxtarr
Xolti Sect
14
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:24:40 -
[81] - Quote
The ore de-spawn mechanic needs to be looked at. I've noticed they tend to just 'clump up' in unoccupied systems. They should just last 72 hours regardless if they have been warped to or not. Oh, and make them sigs again. |
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Reckoning Star Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:34:30 -
[82] - Quote
roxtarr wrote:The ore de-spawn mechanic needs to be looked at. I've noticed they tend to just 'clump up' in unoccupied systems. They should just last 72 hours regardless if they have been warped to or not. Oh, and make them sigs again.
This is true for all sites. Putting a timer on any signature or anomaly regardless of activation would prevent sites from pooling in unoccupied systems. That being said, stumbling on one of those "goldmine" systems is quite a thrill that I'm not sure I would want to give up |
roxtarr
Xolti Sect
14
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:43:03 -
[83] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:roxtarr wrote:The ore de-spawn mechanic needs to be looked at. I've noticed they tend to just 'clump up' in unoccupied systems. They should just last 72 hours regardless if they have been warped to or not. Oh, and make them sigs again. This is true for all sites. Putting a timer on any signature or anomaly regardless of activation would prevent sites from pooling in unoccupied systems. That being said, stumbling on one of those "goldmine" systems is quite a thrill that I'm not sure I would want to give up
I can't imagine that this was the intended consequence of this mechanic. |
Winthorp
2874
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:47:52 -
[84] - Quote
So new sleeper sites are being distributed in known space ehh... |
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Reckoning Star Alliance
186
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 18:52:10 -
[85] - Quote
roxtarr wrote:Obil Que wrote:roxtarr wrote:The ore de-spawn mechanic needs to be looked at. I've noticed they tend to just 'clump up' in unoccupied systems. They should just last 72 hours regardless if they have been warped to or not. Oh, and make them sigs again. This is true for all sites. Putting a timer on any signature or anomaly regardless of activation would prevent sites from pooling in unoccupied systems. That being said, stumbling on one of those "goldmine" systems is quite a thrill that I'm not sure I would want to give up I can't imagine that this was the intended consequence of this mechanic.
I wonder if it would be a negative or positive effect if having a ship active (logged on) inside a wormhole caused the timer to start without warping or otherwise interacting with each anom/sig individually. If the timer was sufficiently long, say 1 week or more, it may not be a negative effect on a home system (all sigs start counting basically as soon as they spawn) but then the lone scout moving through a chain would be triggering a wave of respawns in systems that maybe were otherwise untouched. |
Meiyang Lee
Game Instrument Applications
61
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 19:06:48 -
[86] - Quote
corbexx wrote:This is a PVE little things thread not to be confused with the general little things.
C1 sites with loads of sentry guns, being a issue to people just warping in to see and getting wtf owned.
If the player warping in is not in a frigate (and if he/she intends to run the site, they shouldn't be), then there shouldn't be too much of an issue.
My knowledge is old, so it may well be out of date, but don't these turrets have serious trouble tracking cruiser sized targets with even basic speed mods? My AB fit Sacrilege certainly didn't get hit much once I got my speed up a bit.
Sitting still after warp-in meant my shields were gone in a handful of hits, but once you're moving they won't hurt much.
However, I will say again, this was a long time ago, so CCP may have changed it, but that would be quite a drastic change.
|
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
230
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 19:11:05 -
[87] - Quote
I have no problem with daytrippers being melted, or some sites being significantly harder than others. W-space shouldn't be easy.
My only complaint is that the graphics effects on gas sites and some combat sites melts my video card, and I get huge lag panning around. They really need to optimize the effect generation so that I don't have to move my camera perspective somewhere else in order for the game to be playable. |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
231
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 20:20:49 -
[88] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:roxtarr wrote:The ore de-spawn mechanic needs to be looked at. I've noticed they tend to just 'clump up' in unoccupied systems. They should just last 72 hours regardless if they have been warped to or not. Oh, and make them sigs again. This is true for all sites. Putting a timer on any signature or anomaly regardless of activation would prevent sites from pooling in unoccupied systems. That being said, stumbling on one of those "goldmine" systems is quite a thrill that I'm not sure I would want to give up
There's a chance that eliminating the timer that starts when a site is first warped to would increase conflict, since people would be driven to run the sites in foreign systems, instead of what I see today which is people initiate warp to all the sites in their static, to ensure that none of them survive 3 days without spawning somewhere else, even if they're not going to run them themselves. |
Komodo Askold
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
202
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 20:24:20 -
[89] - Quote
A few Little Things:
- I'm not opposed to the presence of sentries in sites and their difficulty as it has been mentioned before (I do like them), but I think at least they should drop something when destroyed, even if it's just an empty wreck or an standard wreck+blue loot. At least that would balance their other issues.
- I approve of Ore Sites to have a warp-in point located a bit closer to the asteroids. Yes, you might get some more time if someone warps to the site, and using a MWD Venture/Prospect does reduce travel time, but is still a very long distance (in the 100 km order of magnitude). I'd suggest to reduce it to about 80 km as maximum, similar to Gas Sites. You'll still need to bookmark the asteroids for your mining barges if you want to be quick and as safe as possible, though. Unless that's intended.
- As others posted, Data/Relic sites could have their loot concentrated in just a few cans (3-ish), instead of making you trace a full circle of cans for several minutes.
- Those non-harvestable gas clouds are pretty, but they destroy FPS even for high-end machines. I'm sure there are other ways to add some cool ambience without using something so CPU consuming. An improvement in this matter would also help K-space sites, even Mission ones.
- Not sure about the current state of C4, but before the first wave of changes to W-space they were problematic for PVE because they had difficult rats but no Capital Escalations. So, if it's still the case, what about Subcapital Escalations for this class? When enough battleships are on grid, an special reinforcement wave spawns, which might even have 1-2 of the ++ber-Sleeper-battleships that spawn on Capital Escalations, along with their associated, expensive loot. So C4 PVEers would get a small glance at Capital Escalations' money, without reaching those levels, but while being above C3's and not having to use capital ships.
- Some more new variants of Sleeper ships and structures, along with their own models, would be pretty cool and refreshing. Perhaps true Sleeper drones? Sleeper dreadnought? New variants for already existing classes? And please, give Sleepers their own, moving turrets; they keep shooting from their armor plates.
Hope this helps. |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
231
|
Posted - 2014.11.11 23:03:00 -
[90] - Quote
Komodo Askold wrote:- Those non-harvestable gas clouds are pretty, but they destroy FPS even for high-end machines. I'm sure there are other ways to add some cool ambience without using something so CPU consuming. An improvement in this matter would also help K-space sites, even Mission ones.
This.
GTX780
Xeon E3-1290v3
16GB RAM
...
almost unplayable near those clouds |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |