| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
|
kieron
   |
Posted - 2006.08.29 19:56:00 -
[1]
In an effort to resolve some of the issues from last week's code branch update and recent server issues, Tranquility will be patched on Thursday, 31 August. This patch will start at 0800 GMT and is expected to last until 1500 GMT.
Patch Notes are available, and the Known Issues page has been updated to reflect the fixes and changes brought about in this patch. Please support the QA effort by logging in to Singularity and assisting with bug hunting.
We realize this is a departure from our normal Tuesday patch routine, but we feel the fixes and changes made in this patch are too important to leave for a week.
Further information on the server issues can be read in the News Item.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online |
|
|
Suvetar
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 19:57:00 -
[2]
First!
No, seriously, please keep your comments constructive 
|
|
|
Xorus
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 19:58:00 -
[3]
Second 
Remember to set long skills people :)
---
|
|
Joerd Toastius
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:04:00 -
[4]
Whoa whoa WHOA
 Quote:
# If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
What?
|
Epsilon 1
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:07:00 -
[5]
Quote:
The missing warping sound effect has returned.
Why  
Originally by: Steven Gerrard
Why do those minmatarians throw their ships together from toilet paper and junk?
|
Spider Kauphman
Syncore
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:08:00 -
[6]
Quote:
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
What what??
|
|
kieron
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Spider Kauphman
Originally by: Patch Notes
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
What what?
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
The limitation on bookmark copying is to prevent some players from exploiting game mechanics to lag opponents or crash nodes by copying insane amounts of bookmarks.
kieron
Community Manager,
EVE Online |
|
Idara
Caldari
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:12:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Idara on 29/08/2006 20:13:33
What the @#*)?
I hope both of those are goddamn typos.
5 = 500, and Guarantees means will not let the lock under way actually lock you.
This is totally stupid.
|
Caerleus
Board of Twenty
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:12:00 -
[9]
With the cloaking, is that returning to the previous expected behaviour, that is, if you cloak whilst 'being' locked then you cloak, but if you try to cloak whilst locked you don't? The statement in the patch notes is as clear as mud.
Eve is like a new girlfriend - you know its going down at some point, its just when and for how long. |
Joerd Toastius
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:14:00 -
[10]
/me cries for several hours
You do realise you've just broken covops ships, right? I mean, I normally loathe forum theatrics, but... I'm struggling to see how the cloaking change isn't game-breaking for scout pilots.
|
|
|
Grimpak
Gallente
Celestial Horizon Corp.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:15:00 -
[11]
Quote:
The jump queue for systems will only occur if the system in question is on a node using 95% or more CPU. This has previously been hotfixed on TQ.
you mean it will remain the same?
-------
Originally by: Abdalion
Originally by: Jebidus Skari
What, in EVE, is a Tyrant?
Me. Especially when it comes to troll threads.
|
Idara
Caldari
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:15:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Idara on 29/08/2006 20:15:16
Originally by: kieron
Originally by: Spider Kauphman
Originally by: Patch Notes
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
What what?
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
The limitation on bookmark copying is to prevent some players from exploiting game mechanics to lag opponents or crash nodes by copying insane amounts of bookmarks.
No, you're just nerfing instas without actually saying you're nerfing instas and introducing something to make it bearable.
And now there is no point to paying 60m for a Covops Cloak.
|
|
Suvetar
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:21:00 -
[13]
Please, be constructive.
|
|
Idara
Caldari
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:24:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Suvetar
Please, be constructive.
We are.
Nerfing instas like this is not going to be good for anybody.
Nerfing Covops without providing the entire fix right away is not good for anybody.
Not changing the system queues is not good for anybody.
|
Sku1ly
STK Scientific
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:25:00 -
[15]
I'd appreciate a bit of clarification on the cloak thing.
Are you saying that if you are being locked whilst being hitting the cloak you will not cloak, or will you cloak the same? Even if someone has 7 seconds left to lock you?
STK-S |
Tao Han
Caldari
Crucial Electronics
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:26:00 -
[16]
Having been in action vs a certain alliance I can say that the bookmark copyprotection looks good
|
Caerleus
Board of Twenty
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:26:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Caerleus on 29/08/2006 20:26:26
Originally by: kieron
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
Is this serious??
Is someone seriously trying to call this a 'fix'?
Cov ops frigs are the weakest ships in the game..not only that, they have one of the most expensive modules attached to them.
If, CCP are now sticking to current, post 4557 patch method of not allowing a cloak to cloak 'whilst in the process' of being locked, then i'm sorry, you have just killed every scout in the game.
Not only that, it was also one of the only ways to haul in low sec and 0.0, by using a cloak fitted to a hauler.
The reasoning behind this complete nerf should be made public, so at least we can see what is planned for the future and see why CCP have choosen to go this route.
As it stands, this is one of the worst decisions I have seen CCP make in 17 months.
Eve is like a new girlfriend - you know its going down at some point, its just when and for how long. |
Zhaine
B e l l u m
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:27:00 -
[18]
Originally by: kieron
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
Ok, fine, but that needs to be explained fully and honestly before you break the ships in question, not just dumped upon the unexpected populace (by you I mean CCP, not keiron).
The BM thing is a drag, I guess if it's necessary  . But what happens to BM sales? Double
Basically. . . Oh dear. I've never been a forum whiner or really felt the need to criticize Eve or CCP, but I've found Dragon to be a bit of a screw up with Queues, Cov Ops and now BMs.
I hate to say harsh words such as these, but recent descisions seem to come from the position of people who neither play or understand the game on any meaningful level. This isn't to say this is the case: I'm sure it's not in fact, but reasons (and in the case of Queues any warning at all) for some recent descisions haven't been given, let alone discussed by the community, and so this impression is given to players.
- - - - - - - - - -
Quote:
I don't even want a ship, ships are for carebears. Give me a fish bowl for my head (to keep space out) and smear me with lard, then armed with a toasting fork-
|
Bahlan
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:27:00 -
[19]
Originally by: kieron
The limitation on bookmark copying is to prevent some players from exploiting game mechanics to lag opponents or crash nodes by copying insane amounts of bookmarks.
so that means, that insta's will now be extremely expensive or just non existant on the market...
Woa... better go buy some instas now, i feel sorry for the kids that doesn't get instas before this patch. because they're going down.
unless 0km warp is implanted
|
Gorehound
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:28:00 -
[20]
In order to be constructive, I suggest tabasco be included in this patch to reduce the weakness of this sauce.
|
|
|
Ghen
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:29:00 -
[21]
Originally by: kieron
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
Could you give some details on this larger fix please?
|
Idara
Caldari
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:31:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Idara on 29/08/2006 20:31:08
Originally by: Gorehound
In order to be constructive, I suggest tabasco be included in this patch to reduce the weakness of this sauce.
No amount of Tabasco/hot sauce will save this patch from being the weakest of the weak sauce patches.
And yes, do tell us what this coming fix will be concerning cloaks, maybe if we see what "wisdom" you're working on we'll swallow this crap a little easier. 
Pretty glad I didn't buy another Pilgrim right now.
|
Callistus
Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:31:00 -
[23]
Originally by: kieron
Originally by: Spider Kauphman
Originally by: Patch Notes
* If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs.
* Bookmark copying is now limited to 5 bookmarks at a time. Attempting to copy more than 5 bookmarks will result in only 5 being copied.
What what?
The cloaking fix is the first part of a larger fix that will be coming in the near future.
The limitation on bookmark copying is to prevent some players from exploiting game mechanics to lag opponents or crash nodes by copying insane amounts of bookmarks.
I wasn't aware cloaking needed fixing  
So to prevent some individuals exploiting you're making it all but impossible for people to transfer bookmarks to each other?
--------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainfrane] |
Coasterbrian
Celestial Horizon Corp.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:34:00 -
[24]
Please remove jump queues in 0.0, or isolate 0.0 systems from empire ones. The jump queues make almost any kind of PvP in populated regions (or even unpopulated regions, if they happen to share a node with a large empire system) nearly impossible.
This especially applies to fleet warfare, as nobody wants to attempt fleet movements when chances of the fleet getting stuck in a queue are rather high. It also means that if an alliance (ASCN for example) can put 200 people in central systems, attack is impossible.
It also applies to small scale skirmish warfare, because getting stuck in a jump queue with half a dozen hostiles on your tail just isn't cool. One solution for this might be to give people in a jump queue some sort of invulnerability (unbreakable cloak, for example).
----------
I say what I mean, but I don't always mean what I say. |
Gen Maton
Ars Caelestis
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:35:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Caerleus
With the cloaking, is that returning to the previous expected behaviour, that is, if you cloak whilst 'being' locked then you cloak, but if you try to cloak whilst locked you don't? The statement in the patch notes is as clear as mud.
Right now, if you are being locked as you cloak, there are times when the cloaking breaks the lock and other times when it does not. I have heard of an instance where someone was being locked, and cloaked. His view showed him cloaked, but the other player still had a lock and could see him. Once the other player fired a shot, the cloaked player de-cloaked on his machine.
To me, this is is currently saying that if you are being locked when cloaking, it will break the cloak and you will notice it, as opposed to seeing yourself cloaked while the other players can still see you.
|
Joerd Toastius
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:36:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Joerd Toastius on 29/08/2006 20:37:22
I assume the fix that's coming is the oft-called for and largely pointless "cyno field" fix, which allows you to advertise the position of your 200m+ isk ship to the entire system :P
/notbitteratall 
I disagree with the person saying that CCP aren't in touch with the game. I think that's unfair. What I do think is coming out here, if you'll forgive me for being totally honest, is that things are happening in a manner which is not entirely controlled. I don't mean to say that CCP are slacking or not trying hard enough or anything, I'm just getting a mild impression that Dragon, while a good thing in the medium- and long-run, is having knock-on effects which it's going to take CCP a few patches to bring in check. Meh.
{edit} I'm making a conscious effort to try and avoid turning into a Grumpy Forumer here. Please slap me if I start sounding like one :)
|
Loyal Servant
Caldari
Cornhole Inc.
The SUdden Death Squad
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:38:00 -
[27]
OK......
The jump queue for systems will only occur if the system in question is on a node using 95% or more CPU. This has previously been hotfixed on TQ.
So, how the HELL are we supposed to know when this is going to happen?
We don't know when a node is at 95% cpu, and its going to be EXPOLITABLE!
0.0 is TOTALLY BORKED UP NOW AS IT IS!
Your saying we have to LIVE with this?
I am waiting for ships lost as it is because of your stupid queues that we were NOT SUPPOSED TO GET TO START WITH!
Cornhole, Inc. - Cornholeing eve one system at a time.
Member, The Sudden Death Squad [TSDS]
|
Armaege
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:38:00 -
[28]
Well thank you for issuing this patch to help fix some of the problems that have been occuring on TQ. I'm just interested to know if two specific things will be addressed in the upcoming patch.
1) System Queues - I really don't mind in high-sec, Empire space, to help balance the tutorial load and the general traffic that can occur in systems such as Jita, but no doubt you know that in low-sec and 0.0 space this can lead to many-a-petitions about people losing ships because of the queue.
2) Corporate Research - As I understand it, people can output the result of a blueprint research to a different hangar than the BP started in. This heavily limits the ability of corp members to do research, and restricting the output of the research to the same hangar would solve the problem and would be a boon to all corporations.
Also, on the Patch Notes page, it states that, "The jump queue for systems will only occur if the system in question is on a node using 95% or more CPU. This has previously been hotfixed on TQ." This sounds like a good system, but what exactly is a 'node' for how many systems? One node = 1 system? One node = 1 constellation? One node = 1 region? One node = Aardvark to Copenhagen systems?
And what exactly does the queue queue? Once the queue counts down, how many people can be in a 3-minute jump-in queue (on the same node? same system?) at the same time?
---
I agree, a timeline for fixing CovOps ships would be appreciated, and the BM copy limit does sound like a good plan, but perhaps allowing more than 5 copies in certain locations would ease the inevitable whining. Such as if you're docked at an npc station you can copy up to, say, 50 BM's.
Armaege
|
|
Suvetar
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:39:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Idara
We are.
Nerfing instas like this is not going to be good for anybody.
Nerfing Covops without providing the entire fix right away is not good for anybody.
Not changing the system queues is not good for anybody.
I meant to refer to the posts only saying "What?" and "Why?" ... apologies for the confusion.
|
|
Joerd Toastius
Octavian Vanguard
|
Posted - 2006.08.29 20:41:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Suvetar
I meant to refer to the posts only saying "What?" and "Why?" ... apologies for the confusion.
Couldn't think of anything more to say which would have made my point any clearer, sorry :P I was angling for "whoops, that's a typo", TBH...
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |