| 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) |
Kusotarre
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
   |
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:41:00 -
[361]
 Originally by: Ivan Kirilenkov
Thread cleaned a bit, mostly people have been very good at keeping the feedback on a constructive level, and I realize that a lot of people are very unhappy about some of the changes in the patchnotes. However, please continue down the road of constructive feedback, and I'm sure we'll hear more on the cloaking issues as soon as the Devs have had their coffee and some time to chew on the feedback in this thread.
No.
It's not that "a lot of people are very unhappy" about these changes, it's that everyone is unhappy with them.
The only people I've seen here who think this is a good thing are 2 week old nublets in Brutor Tribe, and obvious trolls.
Not a single long time player that I know wants these changes.
This patch will kill fleet combat, and combat in any constellation on the same node as a fleet battle.
This patch will destroy all uses of two classes of ships, one of them irreplaceable for effective gangs.
This patch will cripple PVP excursions to enemy space, where you need bookmarks.
If this patch goes forward, mark my words - Dragon will be seen as the definitive beginning of the end of a once promising game.
|
AKULA UrQuan
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:43:00 -
[362]
Originally by: Mini newswire
I thought when covert ops came out that if u had started to lock a cloaking ship it wouldnt be able to cloak. This would mean that it has been bugged since release and everyone who didnt whine about oh noes the cloak ship i was targeting diserpeared it isnt supposed to do that and now sit back and smile. Finally the real bug has been fixed. All the spies who have followed me and told tales on me are now in trouble.
I for one am so happy this old bug has been fixed and that the coverts can be targeted. Go back and check the features on coverts this is how its supposed to be. Eve devs have fixed a bug celebrate.
Problem is with the change a newb in a frigate can kill a 3 year old vet in a covert ops frig with exactly ZERO skill needed. both SP and personal. All he needs to do is follow some simple directions on how to setup the overview right and then ctrl+click spam in the right spot. I can teach my cat how to do this. There is no way in hell it should be that easy to bag a covert. 
And force recons are just totaly screwed. Unless the devs have more in plan that they haven't bothered to share with us.
Originally by: Wrangler
Win ME is more a some sort of virus than a OS..
|
Lucre
STK Scientific
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:44:00 -
[363]
Originally by: Sharcy
13 Pages of whine without even knowing how the changes will work exactly. Brilliant.
Which part of queuing "has previously been hotfixed on TQ" are you finding hard of comprehension? It's already in so we know exactly how it's "working". And that's why we're so concerned because truly it sucketh bigtime.
-- This is not the patch we're looking for.
|
PanzerGrenadier
Caldari
Templars of Space
CORE.
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:47:00 -
[364]
CCP please reply to the post that has been quoted numerous times in this thread. Since I can't do it myself because the forums are messed (new issue entirely).
|
Scorpyn
Caldari
Infinitus Odium
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:50:00 -
[365]
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.
I see. The jump queues are here to stay.
Well, it was fun while it lasted. I'll give you a bit more time to fix this before leaving, but it doesn't seem like you will 
|
Arvo Henderson
Draconis Navitas Aeterna
Pure.
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:53:00 -
[366]
Edited by: Arvo Henderson on 30/08/2006 09:53:15
/me dons amiantum suit
After thinking a bit about the cloak "changes" to be honest, I will be happy if the devs have the balls to keep that change, tbh. We all have seen more than once how cloakers, in the hands of a pilot with half a brain, were able to get through almost any gatecamp one could think of. It was very very frustrating.
In fact, it was too hard to get a cloaking ship: with this change, now they have an "Achilles Heel" that makes them vulnerable, so careful cov ops pilots will have to be very alert when they get uncloaked (either by jumping through a gate, or by other means). Just check killboards, and get some numbers about covops ships being busted, and compare them with other ships numbers.
Fitting stabs/nanofibers/ecm/dampeners in a cloaking ship will now be something anybody sensible should think of.
Some complains I've seen in this thread like the one saying "now a long BS cycle won't allow me to cloak", are just crap. First, even with two sensor boosters and Signature Analysis V, you'll have your good 5 seconds to align to a planet/moon/SS and warp. Second, once you warp, you can warp back to the gate at a good distance cloaked.
Bombers on the other hand might be needing some help - you'll have now to uncloak, shoot & warp. What CCP should do is to increase their alpha strike damage substantially, either by allowing them to fit more launchers or increasing damage modifiers.
The only thing I think I agree with most of the people complaining here, is the way this change has been made public. Telling the peeps beforehand would have saved more than a few forum posts.
|
Pedo Fortis
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:54:00 -
[367]
Wow, 9 pages of response for half a page of patch notes.
If we get this much comment from a patch what will Kali be like?
What this says to me is that it would be a good idea if CCP showed the patch notes to a group of 5-10 selected old timer whiners (under nda) _before_ they publish it.
That way any fuzzy sentences could be cleaned up (aka cloak ôeffectö change), or some extra explanation given (i.e. insta copy limit of 5 will reduce total server load by n%).
Lastly why o why donÆt we queue during the jump rather than before jumping?
Pedo
|
Voodoosuicide
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:54:00 -
[368]
normally i don't troll the eve forums as doing so has made me all too aware of the sum of drama in the prior mmo's i've played. such is the case here however, now i'm hearing every local channel screaming as well as "non-drama" peeps i've known for some time of getting f'd in more than 1 manner.
after reading the patch notes, i can not help but wonder if those who whine louder are being catered to moreso than the larger sum of paying customers. discuss?
|
Sharcy
Sonnema
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:55:00 -
[369]
Originally by: Lucre
Originally by: Sharcy
13 Pages of whine without even knowing how the changes will work exactly. Brilliant.
Which part of queuing "has previously been hotfixed on TQ" are you finding hard of comprehension? It's already in so we know exactly how it's "working". And that's why we're so concerned because truly it sucketh bigtime.
I was referring to the cloak whines, but regarding the queues:
When you do large fleetbattles you complain of lag and scream that the game is unplayable. When they do something about the lag (caused by node overload, yes), you complain that you "can't all get in at once". Well guess what, I find the queue system completely logical, both from a technical point of view, as well as "in character". If stargates really existed, it would make perfect sense that they can handle only so much traffic at once. 
--
Sonnema is recruiting! |
Therem Harth
DAB
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 09:56:00 -
[370]
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 am usualy (and still) very respectful of the insane amount of work developers do behind the scenes. However, this paticular time I am forced to say - I do not believe you. Credibility of development team responsiveness, or even attentiveness to community is suffering in my eyes, and I'm afraid in many others.
All the latest happenings since Dragon deployment - queue system, the adventures of cloaking bug, and now even the attempt to limit bm copying, - are terribly conceived, hardly thought through and are a slap in the face of community. We had worse troubles after Exodus deployment, but those were genuine post-patch problems, not let's-change-it-maybe-it-works-that-way problems.
To remain constructive, I'll try to reiterate apparent problems:
- queue system now arbitrarily locks player out of, or in combat. Node limitations are irrelevant to players due to invisible OOC load distribution system
- the whole idea of attempted (as opposed to completed) lock uncloaking a covert ops ship totaly negates covert ops idea. Just removing this class of ships from the game would be easier
- bm copy restrictions automatically create a class of the elite who have bms now and solve nothing at all. For the purpose stated it would be enough to limit the amount bms in ship's hold, and if limiting the amount of bms copied at once, then by some sane number, like 50. There are countless other viable ideas on bm reimplementation which you are certainly aware of as well.
--
|
|
|
Dupac
Corsets and Carebears
Whips and Chains
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:01:00 -
[371]
It's hard to be constructive when the patch is so destructive to the game but...
Cloaking:
I assume the devs actually play the game in which case they must realise that this change renders cov ops, stealth bombers and cloaking recons completely worthless. Scouting past gate camps will be almost impossible and a lot of pvp play styles are ruined as a result. This is a terrible idea - if it's bugged fix it rather than destroying the cov ops module.
Jump Queues:
This is not being fixed - The are loads of reasons why this is a bad idea - see the many threads on it - it's another pvp game breaker.
BM Copying:
Firstly - many thanks for the chance to post feedback on this idea one day before you introduce it. This is a poor "fix". If you want to nerf bm's do it, don't mess around with a poorly conceived fix. Players with lots of bm's (including me) gain a great advantage over those with none, prices for bm's are about to treble, it doesn't fix insta jumps and it's a pointless timesink.
It's fairly apparent - with regard to the cloaking and traffic queues that players are not being listened to and is extremely dissapointing. I'm not doing anything as pointless as threatening to quit, but the handling of this and the dismissive way that these changes are being introduced has made me think about it for the first time
|
Juan Andalusian
TAOSP
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:03:00 -
[372]
Edited by: Juan Andalusian on 30/08/2006 10:03:24
Originally by: Sharcy
Originally by: Pedo Fortis
Lastly why o why donÆt we queue during the jump rather than before jumping?
Because this way, you have a chance to change your mind and choose another route or destination
The only thing you will be choosing is the colour of your new velator as you load the cloning station after being ganked by the people who were camping the queuing gate that was leading to a system that had 2 pilots in it.
**Pain is meant to be felt** |
Pestillence
Contraband Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:06:00 -
[373]
Originally by: Sharcy
When you do large fleetbattles you complain of lag and scream that the game is unplayable. When they do something about the lag (caused by node overload, yes), you complain that you "can't all get in at once". Well guess what, I find the queue system completely logical, both from a technical point of view, as well as "in character". If stargates really existed, it would make perfect sense that they can handle only so much traffic at once.
If udianoor in the arse end of Aridia with a population of 5 people and a tumbleweed is experiencing queues because it shares a node with Scolluzer and CPU usage hits 95% this makes sense to you?
Technically I can agree with it, roleplay wise it in no way makes sense. Technically I'm sure cars would be better without seats, car makers recognize the need to place their users first though.
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:06:00 -
[374]
About the cloaking issue. There has been a little in house misunderstanding. The problem is that the way cloaking works now is that if you are being targetted but aren't locked you can cloak but the lock attempt isn't broken so when you're locked you get uncloaked but there is a bug where the uncloaking visual effect isn't performed so you happily think you're still cloaked.
The fix in the patch notes and the one Kieron mentioned fixes the issue of not seeing you uncloak. However cloaks didn't use to work this way, if nobody had you locked when you cloaked, all locking attempts were broken and you stayed happily cloaked. That is the way it supposed to work and we'll be restoring it back the way it was.
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
_______________ |
|
Vandervecken Smith
Aerial Boundaries Inc.
Interstellar Starbase Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:08:00 -
[375]
Originally by: Tuxford
About the cloaking issue. There has been a little in house misunderstanding. The problem is that the way cloaking works now is that if you are being targetted but aren't locked you can cloak but the lock attempt isn't broken so when you're locked you get uncloaked but there is a bug where the uncloaking visual effect isn't performed so you happily think you're still cloaked.
The fix in the patch notes and the one Kieron mentioned fixes the issue of not seeing you uncloak. However cloaks didn't use to work this way, if nobody had you locked when you cloaked, all locking attempts were broken and you stayed happily cloaked. That is the way it supposed to work and we'll be restoring it back the way it was.
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
Huzzah!
Thanks for the clarification, It is a bug. You will get to it.
Basically, Dragon broke CovOps and they need to be fixed soon. You plan to fix it. Fantastic. Now the only question is "how fast?"
Still the BM issue but I expect that's someone else's department.
|
coldplasma
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:09:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Ivan Kirilenkov
Thread cleaned a bit, mostly people have been very good at keeping the feedback on a constructive level, and I realize that a lot of people are very unhappy about some of the changes in the patchnotes. However, please continue down the road of constructive feedback, and I'm sure we'll hear more on the cloaking issues as soon as the Devs have had their coffee and some time to chew on the feedback in this thread.
EVERYONE is unhappy about these changes. If CCP go down this road and implement this patch, they will have completely ignored the community. Everytime this happens with a game dev, the community gets smaller and smaller until it's nothing more than a nugget.
Another thing. The cloaking bug isn't the only issue here. Everyone in my alliance and almost everyone in this thread is outraged by this new BM copying limit. It is ridiculous and solves nothing. I believe the statement that someone quoted earlier "The operation was a success, but the patient died" could not be more applicable. Here's a message for CCP. TEMP-BAN PEOPLE WHO EXPLOIT THIS! Why must the rest of the community suffer simply because a couple of idiotic alliances choose to use such unsportsman like tactics?
Jump queues solve nothing, in reality, they cause more congestion and more incovienience in the long run. Nobody wants to be running from pirates only to find that they can't enter their own system because of a fleet battle in another system x amount of jumps away!
____________________________
See you in 0.0 kids... |
Mea Zhong
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:09:00 -
[377]
New cloaking device feature is the worst mistake CCP could made.
CovOp device can only be fitted on certan ships and their role is important for overall gameplay.
Other two cloaking devices have penalties making them useless on most of ships for runing thru g8 camps. Raly who cann't decloak badger or anything else going at 50m/s while cloaked, when decloaking range is 2500m (or 1500 cann't remmeber now) ?
Any ceptor pilot can get to cloaked ship within 90km and decloak him, not to mention someone cloaking at 15km from g8....
BMS solution #1:
As for bookmarks, simply remove all existing bookmarks and introduce restrictions on making bms near g8, ie. minimum range for making bms from g8 100km - since the maximum warp to range is 100km. Also add warp to 0km but don't allow the default warp to range to be less then 15km.
BMS solution #2
And as for copying bms, someone said that curently copying limit is 80 bms, but this was tested on several accounts and proven to be very wrong. You can actualy copy 200-300 bms at the time and that is the most likely to be the problem. Making it a 50 bms batch should make this problem less resource consuming.
queueing should really be made on system or constelation level...
current node level of queueing makes life in some part of galaxy impossible...
|
James Don
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:09:00 -
[378]
Originally by: Tuxford
About the cloaking issue. There has been a little in house misunderstanding. The problem is that the way cloaking works now is that if you are being targetted but aren't locked you can cloak but the lock attempt isn't broken so when you're locked you get uncloaked but there is a bug where the uncloaking visual effect isn't performed so you happily think you're still cloaked.
The fix in the patch notes and the one Kieron mentioned fixes the issue of not seeing you uncloak. However cloaks didn't use to work this way, if nobody had you locked when you cloaked, all locking attempts were broken and you stayed happily cloaked. That is the way it supposed to work and we'll be restoring it back the way it was.
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
Thanks for the clarification Tux and restoring my faith in CCP, even if it is a little shaken!
James
--------------------------------------------
notify : Your cloaking systems are unable to activate due to your ship being within 2000 meters of the nearby Snowballs. |
Sharcy
Sonnema
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:10:00 -
[379]
Originally by: Tuxford
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
Maybe it's me, but this last line confuses me. Can you clarify what you mean by "this"?
--
Sonnema is recruiting! |
pennzoil
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:12:00 -
[380]
Originally by: Therem Harth
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 am usualy (and still) very respectful of the insane amount of work developers do behind the scenes. However, this paticular time I am forced to say - I do not believe you. Credibility of development team responsiveness, or even attentiveness to community is suffering in my eyes, and I'm afraid in many others.
All the latest happenings since Dragon deployment - queue system, the adventures of cloaking bug, and now even the attempt to limit bm copying, - are terribly conceived, hardly thought through and are a slap in the face of community. We had worse troubles after Exodus deployment, but those were genuine post-patch problems, not let's-change-it-maybe-it-works-that-way problems.
To remain constructive, I'll try to reiterate apparent problems:
- queue system now arbitrarily locks player out of, or in combat. Node limitations are irrelevant to players due to invisible OOC load distribution system
- the whole idea of attempted (as opposed to completed) lock uncloaking a covert ops ship totaly negates covert ops idea. Just removing this class of ships from the game would be easier
- bm copy restrictions automatically create a class of the elite who have bms now and solve nothing at all. For the purpose stated it would be enough to limit the amount bms in ship's hold, and if limiting the amount of bms copied at once, then by some sane number, like 50. There are countless other viable ideas on bm reimplementation which you are certainly aware of as well.
Awesome post Therem I agree completely and this is exactlly how I feel but couldn't think of a comstructive way to say it.
|
|
|
Callistus
Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:12:00 -
[381]
Edited by: Callistus on 30/08/2006 10:12:50
Originally by: Tuxford
About the cloaking issue. There has been a little in house misunderstanding. The problem is that the way cloaking works now is that if you are being targetted but aren't locked you can cloak but the lock attempt isn't broken so when you're locked you get uncloaked but there is a bug where the uncloaking visual effect isn't performed so you happily think you're still cloaked.
The fix in the patch notes and the one Kieron mentioned fixes the issue of not seeing you uncloak. However cloaks didn't use to work this way, if nobody had you locked when you cloaked, all locking attempts were broken and you stayed happily cloaked. That is the way it supposed to work and we'll be restoring it back the way it was.
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
<3 Tux
The only question is; how long until cloaking returns to normal?
--------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainfrane] |
Chewan Mesa
Beagle Corp
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:13:00 -
[382]
Originally by: Sharcy
Originally by: Lucre
Originally by: Sharcy
13 Pages of whine without even knowing how the changes will work exactly. Brilliant.
Which part of queuing "has previously been hotfixed on TQ" are you finding hard of comprehension? It's already in so we know exactly how it's "working". And that's why we're so concerned because truly it sucketh bigtime.
I was referring to the cloak whines, but regarding the queues:
When you do large fleetbattles you complain of lag and scream that the game is unplayable. When they do something about the lag (caused by node overload, yes), you complain that you "can't all get in at once". Well guess what, I find the queue system completely logical, both from a technical point of view, as well as "in character". If stargates really existed, it would make perfect sense that they can handle only so much traffic at once.
Ehrm, you so completely dont understand anything...
The queue-system stops you from jumping into systems that are ON A NODE that has 95% cpu...
This absolutely doesnt make any sense "in-character" nor OOC. How do you justify waiting 2mins to jump into an empty 0.0 system just because it has the bad luck on being on a node with Jita? How do you justify 20 people losing their ships because a hostile fleet ganked them as they couldnt jump?
It hasnt happened to me yet with the ganking part, but it will inevitably sooner or later.
Sure we complain about lag, but fixing something halfway without even announcing what the whole plan is is bad...
|
|
Tuxford
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:14:00 -
[383]
Originally by: Sharcy
Originally by: Tuxford
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
Maybe it's me, but this last line confuses me. Can you clarify what you mean by "this"?
Basically that this was considered a feature change. Nobody told me, and I assume that I would be told as I'm gonna get blamed anyway Basically I'm excusing that I don't know a timeframe for a fix because I haven't really had time to look into this but its on the right track now.
_______________ |
|
Verus Potestas
Caldari
Fiat Mort
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:16:00 -
[384]
I <3 the tux!
|
coldplasma
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:16:00 -
[385]
Originally by: Tuxford
About the cloaking issue. There has been a little in house misunderstanding. The problem is that the way cloaking works now is that if you are being targetted but aren't locked you can cloak but the lock attempt isn't broken so when you're locked you get uncloaked but there is a bug where the uncloaking visual effect isn't performed so you happily think you're still cloaked.
The fix in the patch notes and the one Kieron mentioned fixes the issue of not seeing you uncloak. However cloaks didn't use to work this way, if nobody had you locked when you cloaked, all locking attempts were broken and you stayed happily cloaked. That is the way it supposed to work and we'll be restoring it back the way it was.
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
So what about BM's? What about this horrendous jump queue? You guys are just gonna blot out the communities say on this and go ahead with these ridiculous game-breaking features?
____________________________
See you in 0.0 kids... |
Lemoning Lemming
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:18:00 -
[386]
Please do not proceed with Jump queues, please.
|
Arvo Henderson
Draconis Navitas Aeterna
Pure.
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:18:00 -
[387]
Edited by: Arvo Henderson on 30/08/2006 10:19:52
Nobody has answered me at all... but I would really want the new cloak "feature" to stay. There should not be any "I Win" buttons in Eve.
You weren't told Tux (nor us), but it is not necessarily a bad idea, regardless of the outcry people have raised in this thread.
|
Kusotarre
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:18:00 -
[388]
Originally by: Sharcy
Originally by: Lucre
Originally by: Sharcy
13 Pages of whine without even knowing how the changes will work exactly. Brilliant.
Which part of queuing "has previously been hotfixed on TQ" are you finding hard of comprehension? It's already in so we know exactly how it's "working". And that's why we're so concerned because truly it sucketh bigtime.
I was referring to the cloak whines, but regarding the queues:
When you do large fleetbattles you complain of lag and scream that the game is unplayable. When they do something about the lag (caused by node overload, yes), you complain that you "can't all get in at once". Well guess what, I find the queue system completely logical, both from a technical point of view, as well as "in character". If stargates really existed, it would make perfect sense that they can handle only so much traffic at once.
1) You can test the cov ops changes. Cov ops die everytime. Read juduzzs post, FFS.
2) The queue system is indefensible. With it's implementation, the best way to defend a system is clear - log in everyone you can, and have them orbit a friendly POS with all kinds of modules running. People will do it, and it will work very, very well at massacring the enemy fleets that trickle into system.
The solution to Eve's lag problem cannot be, as you are suggesting, to introduce a system which is more insufferable than the lag was. What it probably comes down to is that CCP needs to fork out the money to buy more hardware. There is clearly too much load for too few nodes.
Anyways, Sharcy, it's apparent you have no interest in fleetbattles, flying covert ops, or copying BMs for legitimate use. If you did, you would be as upset as the rest of us that this patch may actually go forward.
|
|
wystler
Forum Moderator
Interstellar Services Department
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:18:00 -
[389]
From this point on, anyone who is about to post about the cloaking issue destroying the game, please read this official post explaining what it actually does.
Anyone not having read this and posting another rant will find their post disappears quickly
Please read the official post to avoid being further distressed by the situation, thanks!
|
|
Joshua Foiritain
Gallente
Coreli Corporation
|
Posted - 2006.08.30 10:19:00 -
[390]
Originally by: Tuxford
Originally by: Sharcy
Originally by: Tuxford
I don't really know when that will happen though. It was really news to me that this "wasn't a bug" until this morning so I've been talking to other devs and bughunters about this.
Maybe it's me, but this last line confuses me. Can you clarify what you mean by "this"?
Basically that this was considered a feature change. Nobody told me, and I assume that I would be told as I'm gonna get blamed anyway Basically I'm excusing that I don't know a timeframe for a fix because I haven't really had time to look into this but its on the right track now.
Tuxy if you where a girl id ask you out on a date! 
-----
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |