EVE Search - Covert Ops Ships Made Crap Coz CCP Poor Programming Skills?

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Covert Ops Ships Made Crap Coz CCP Poor Programming Skills?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
InnerDrive	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:26:00 - [1] So there is this issue with cloaks and cynos being the same programming in the game right? CCP tryd to make people that make cynos lockable right? They did that but also made people that cloak lockable as long ya showing on overview right? And after 3000 people lost their covert ops coz someone bashed ctrl + click on overview when they jumped and had em petition. They put this BUG up on the known issues page as a MAJOR ISSUE together with blueprints showing being original. And they than tryd to fix this BUG in game programming but coudent do it and than removed the BUG from known issues and made it so that its a new feature in the patch notes: http://myeve.eve-online.com/updates/patchnotes.asp?patchlogid=93&sid=608304548 If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs
Nybbas A Place for Valen	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:28:00 - [2] yeah, that is ridiculous.... i like to at least have the feeling i am safe when i fly around in a 9 mil isk frig with a freaking 60 mil isk cloaking mod fitted : /
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:30:00 - [3] We can't figure out where we **** up, let's just call it a feature and be done with it. My Guides**
Tiuwaz Minmatar Omacron Militia Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:32:00 - [4] ahahah Originally by: Oveur This is not the conspiracy you are looking for.
Samirol Ore Mongers	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:32:00 - [5] Originally by: Aeaus We can't figure out where we ****** up, let's just call it a feature and be done with it. Its THIS big!
inSpirAcy Caldari The Solopwnmobiles	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:33:00 - [6] Originally by: Tiuwaz ahahah Your sig is amusingly appropriate.
Sev Renard Gallente Storm Armada	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:36:00 - [7] Coming from a programming background... give these guys a break for once. I'm sorry, but if they decide they favour a certain mechanic that might have originated as a bug, that's their choice, not ours. Also, this probably had to do more with the abuse of non-covert cloaks on large ships using them to escape lock. It's now up to covert pilots to be even more cautious, seeing as that forum petitions and whining don't exactly power the magical wand of fixing that many people believe the programmers/devs have, but choose not to use. ____________________ If this sig isn't transparent in places... you need a better browser
Azurae	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:41:00 - [8] It's not a Bug it's a feature. Now i know where this sentence comes from. :o
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:43:00 - [9] Originally by: Sev Renard Coming from a programming background... give these guys a break for once. I'm sorry, but if they decide they favour a certain mechanic that might have originated as a bug, that's their choice, not ours. Also, this probably had to do more with the abuse of non-covert cloaks on large ships using them to escape lock. It's now up to covert pilots to be even more cautious, seeing as that forum petitions and whining don't exactly power the magical wand of fixing that many people believe the programmers/devs have, but choose not to use. I might not have the background you have, but in my experiences it isn't acceptable to leave something you can't fix and turn it into a feature. The basic premise here is that without the bug originating this would never become a "feature." What abuse of non-covert cloaks? First time I've ever heard of somebody complaining over a very long retargetting period and a gimped sensor resolution to simply escape getting locked, how long does it take to lock a large ship anyways, several seconds? My Guides
Sev Renard Gallente Storm Armada	Posted - 2006.08.29 22:53:00 - [10] Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Sev Renard <stuff I wrote> I might not have the background you have, but in my experiences it isn't acceptable to leave something you can't fix and turn it into a feature. The basic premise here is that without the bug originating this would never become a "feature." What abuse of non-covert cloaks? First time I've ever heard of somebody complaining over a very long retargetting period and a gimped sensor resolution to simply escape getting locked, how long does it take to lock a large ship anyways, several seconds? I'll admit that the non-cov cloak bit was purely speculation, but I'm trying to think of a reason they wouldn't base the cloaking off of an older version of the cloak code if they honestly wanted to fix it. Perhaps there's going to be an obscure rp dev post regarding a "gal-net sensor upgrade patch" to all of our ships. ____________________ If this sig isn't transparent in places... you need a better browser
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse	Posted - 2006.08.29 23:02:00 - [11] So it is now an officially introduced feature? Well at least the price of cloaks will come down if thats the case. :(
Centurin Sturmgrenadier Inc R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.29 23:24:00 - [12] What a pile of ****. Its a shame that Cov ops just became useless. ----------------------------------------------- "Freedom is the right of all sentient beings" - Optimus Prime
Major Raditz 133rd Ghost Wing R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.29 23:38:00 - [13] First T2 ship i decided to skill towards is now useless. High five CCP!
Xiao Up	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:04:00 - [14] So, now, all you have to have is a stealth bomber or a hac sitting right next to a gate, with 3 T2 sensor boosters, and you control-click the covert when it jumps through and shows up in your overview... and bam, instapop? Yeah, i'm with the last poster - first T2 ship I skilled for, and I bought it 2 days before the patch.... and now it's worthless. Thanks.
Thunderbird Anthares The New Empire R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:11:00 - [15] its just an outrage to turn own mistakes into "features" i just bought a covops when this was still listed as major bug,and got destroyed in it because of it,so 70mil down the drain+some stuff i carried for my corpmates few days later its a "feature" and i can start to wonder if i will even get reimbursed CCP made a huge mistake by using same code for cynos and cloaks,so first the recons were getting the bug-nerf,now its a kill for the covert-ops. If you want to nerf cloaks like this,nerf the proto and improved one as you please,but killing a covops like this,and right when i bought my first one,and lost it because of major bug called a feature now,im pretty p*ssed as you can imagine. ------------------------------------------------ When you get to the end of your journey,everything that really matters is the journey itself.
Thunderbird Anthares The New Empire R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:14:00 - [16] Originally by: Xiao Up So, now, all you have to have is a stealth bomber or a hac sitting right next to a gate, with 3 T2 sensor boosters, and you control-click the covert when it jumps through and shows up in your overview... and bam, instapop? Yeah, i'm with the last poster - first T2 ship I skilled for, and I bought it 2 days before the patch.... and now it's worthless. Thanks. the best part is you dont even need a fast locker when this happened to me,the ceptor targetting me didnt have "exceptionally" fast lock my cloak blinked in green,so i said fine,im outta here,and right when i clicked the warp,cloak grayed out (with inty at over 6km),i got scrambled,and pwned like the worst noob ------------------------------------------------ When you get to the end of your journey,everything that really matters is the journey itself.
Nathanial Victor	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:19:00 - [17] Guess they got tired of us asking them to fix current content before adding new content.... would file this one under "developmental process workaround". No need to fix it if they document that they wanted it this way. This is def a big disappointment. I hear they said they just dont have the time/resources to reprogram this portion of the code, but they have plenty of time/resources for the asian server and new CCG plz dont cast us aside ccp. we are the ppl that brought you where you are today, this is Grade A, #1, ub3rGHEY
Duban Banned	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:27:00 - [18] compared to most online games CCP has suprized me time and time again with good content, and they've jsut done a very good job. Though i must say i'm very disapointed at this . . . stupidity.
DRMALIKIA Trade and Research Technologies	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:28:00 - [19] Edited by: DRMALIKIA on 30/08/2006 00:31:17 I am going to break this down into parts as I see it, educate me if I am incorrect on anything: Comment made by CCP "If a ship that is being targeted, and cloaks, the lock will now guarantee the uncloak effect occurs" #1 MY SHIP<<------ATTEMPTING TO TARGET<<------ENEMY #2 (MY SHIP CLOAKS)<<--------STILL ATTEMPTING TARGET<<------ENEMY #3 (MY SHIP CLOAKED)<<--------LOCKED<<--------ENEMY can see me, I die. I am not going to pretend to be an expert Covert Ops Pilot but, they are talking about the "EFFECT" of not being cloaked. Two things bother me about this situation. 1) If you are being targeted I thought you couldn't cloak, lock or not, if they were attempting, you couldn't use your cloak? (TRUE or FALSE) 2) "EFFECT" to me can be the "VISUAL EFFECT" and "THE PHYSICAL EFFECT" of being cloaked/not cloaked. Which of the two is CCP refering to? 3) If my first question is TRUE, then there sounds as if there was a "VISUAL EFFECT" bug. When activating the cloaking device it only worked visually (your ship can't be seen) but in reality your ship is locked and you are "word meaing Fornication Under Consent of the King"ED. 4) If question 1 is FALSE, and you can cloak whether someone is attempting a lock or you are locked, and the "EFFECT" is physical, then CCP has nerfed the abilities of a cloaking ship. I have always hated how they never follow traditional Scifi shows in regards to cloaks. Damn, the Romulans (STAR TREK) have been using cloaking devices for centuries. "Cloak & Go" has been a popular Romulan slogan throughout the Empire. You run into trouble, cloak and get the hell out of dodge!!!!! How much more is CCP going to break the poor Covert Pilot's b@!!s? I mean the poor guys barely get laid as it is being cloaked all the time. Sleeping every night with their Covert Ops Cloaking Device T2 in fear of getting killed and having to buy another 60 Million isk module. Someone had mentioned a petition thread? If you find it please post it in this thread as well, spread the word!!!!! Cloaking is already nerfed, let's not turn it into an official "NERF" product. \|)O( The doctor is at your service.
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:49:00 - [20] CCP messed something up while trying to fix something that useses similar code: That is perfectly understandable, and while I don't like it I can deal with it. They admitted their mistake and put it on the known bugs page and I'm placated because I assume it will be fixed in the next patch. A few days later CCP apparently realizes that it may be hard to fix and move it from "Known Issues" to "Features (Patch Notes)". This really ticks me off. I don't have a problem with a bug, they happen, I know this because I happen to be a coder myself. But what really angers me is when CCP messes something up and then claims it was intended. CCP THIS IS BS ADMIT YOU SCREWED UP AND FIX IT NEXT PATCH. CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.08.30 00:53:00 - [21] Edited by: Aeaus on 30/08/2006 00:53:57 Before if you're cloaked the only way you were forced to be uncloaked is if you turned it off or got within any object under 2,000 meters. Before if you were locked you could't cloak. Good covert ops pilots couldn't possibly be locked during the time they jumped to when they hit the cloak (usually this gets worked out to under a second). Most interceptors wouldn't be kitted to insta-locking so catching a good covert ops pilot that's only doing recon with anything less then a warp bubble would be nigh impossible. Now if you start locking a covert ops ship and it cloaks, when your locking time ends the covert ops ship uncloaks. At least how I understand it from the patch notes. Well let's look at the problem here, you aren't going to be able to react fast enough to not show up as a blip on the overview, and once you do anybody can lock you and you will uncloak when the cycle is finished. This means that a slow and vulnerable covert ops ship worth about 100M and completely uninsurable can be caught by almost any ship at a gate that (to make it easier, filter for CO only) can ctrl-click spam. Edit : And the covert ops pilot has NO clue that this is occuring since they appear cloaked to themselves and the module is still blinking green. My Guides
Mr Peanut The New Empire R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:13:00 - [22] They're not "made crap". I can't really think of a big way that this would affect game mechanics. If someone can, please enlighten me. After all, you can't cloak while locked anyway, so I think that the ones that really took a blow were the Pilgrims who warp into a belt with a few BS ratting or something and try to "WTF CLOAK", whereupon they are oblitterated. This doesn't really affect bombers too much either, assuming that you're flying a long-range fitted bomber and being smart by not warping into things with hostiles in local at 15k (the two go together IMO unless you're fighting frigs), because almost nothing can lock you at 100k+ with 1-2 best named or T2 sensor damps on them. That, and the fact that it doesn't really affect travel, because they would have to be insta-lock ships with awesome reflexes to lock you before you could cloak.
Kai Jyokoroi 133rd Ghost Wing R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:14:00 - [23] Normally I don't whine, but so, so /SIGNED. The BEST thing about covert ops is that they were hard to catch. Now any noob in a rifter with a sebo II and a spammy left click can turn your 65m perfect scout into dust with absolutely no effort required to probe you out or bump you. It's called the "Covert Ops Cloak" for a reason, not the "55 million isk module that means if they manage to even start locking you you're screwed Cloak". It's not a feature, it's a BUG. Get it FIXED. It's just rendered my brand new 250 mil Arazu set-up that I was REALLY looking forward to playing with totally worthless because it's going to get killed at the next gatecamp I try to take it past. Thanks a whole friggin' bunch, CCP. _____________ The day I receive my first moderator forum-sig hijack is the day I realise I have won Eve.
lasergazer	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:15:00 - [24] yep this is totally stupid guess ill toss pilgrim on the scrap heap now bloody annoying ccp
Aeaus Tharsis Security	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:18:00 - [25] Originally by: Mr Peanut They're not "made crap". I can't really think of a big way that this would affect game mechanics. If someone can, please enlighten me. After all, you can't cloak while locked anyway, so I think that the ones that really took a blow were the Pilgrims who warp into a belt with a few BS ratting or something and try to "WTF CLOAK", whereupon they are oblitterated. This doesn't really affect bombers too much either, assuming that you're flying a long-range fitted bomber and being smart by not warping into things with hostiles in local at 15k (the two go together IMO unless you're fighting frigs), because almost nothing can lock you at 100k+ with 1-2 best named or T2 sensor damps on them. That, and the fact that it doesn't really affect travel, because they would have to be insta-lock ships with awesome reflexes to lock you before you could cloak. Uhm, no... - Covert OPs Hunting Gatecamp - All you need is a ship smaller then a cruiser. And you need one overview setting with nothing but covert ops. As soon as you expect a covert ops to pass by you start spamming the overview (ctrl + click) where the covert ops will show up (this is very many times under a second for most pilots). There, absolutely no effort except for one overview setting and you can catch almost any covert ops pilot. Covert OPs move SLOWLY so you will definately lock during that time period, and then all it takes is a few disruptors and your target is caught =/ Hell, I'm sure a battleship with a few sensor modules could pull this off. My Guides
Kai Jyokoroi 133rd Ghost Wing R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:31:00 - [26] Edited by: Kai Jyokoroi on 30/08/2006 01:32:46 Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Mr Peanut They're not "made crap". I can't really think of a big way that this would affect game mechanics. If someone can, please enlighten me. After all, you can't cloak while locked anyway, so I think that the ones that really took a blow were the Pilgrims who warp into a belt with a few BS ratting or something and try to "WTF CLOAK", whereupon they are oblitterated. This doesn't really affect bombers too much either, assuming that you're flying a long-range fitted bomber and being smart by not warping into things with hostiles in local at 15k (the two go together IMO unless you're fighting frigs), because almost nothing can lock you at 100k+ with 1-2 best named or T2 sensor damps on them. That, and the fact that it doesn't really affect travel, because they would have to be insta-lock ships with awesome reflexes to lock you before you could cloak. I know if they don't fix this I'm going to start making sure there's at least one person doing that in the gangs I'm in. Covert Ops are now so much easier to catch than they used to be. Uhm, no... - Covert OPs Hunting Gatecamp - All you need is a ship smaller then a cruiser. And you need one overview setting with nothing but covert ops. As soon as you expect a covert ops to pass by you start spamming the overview (ctrl + click) where the covert ops will show up (this is very many times under a second for most pilots). There, absolutely no effort except for one overview setting and you can catch almost any covert ops pilot. Covert OPs move SLOWLY so you will definately lock during that time period, and then all it takes is a few disruptors and your target is caught =/ Hell, I'm sure a battleship with a few sensor modules could pull this off. I'm damn sure people are gonna start using this tactic. I know I will. When word gets out of how to do this, covops are going to be worse than useless (they're going to be expensive as well as a good way of getting you killed...) _____________ The day I receive my first moderator forum-sig hijack is the day I realise I have won Eve.
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.08.30 01:33:00 - [27] Before this bug most inties couldn't target a cov ops before it cloaked. Now, a carrier with a 35second lock time could un-cloak a cov ops. How is that not much of a difference? CFW (Certified Forum Warrior) I kill people ingame too.
MidnightMeadows	Posted - 2006.08.30 02:55:00 - [28] /signed This is ridiculous, let's get this fixed ASAP.
Mr Peanut The New Empire R i s e	Posted - 2006.08.30 03:12:00 - [29] Originally by: Aeaus Originally by: Mr Peanut They're not "made crap". I can't really think of a big way that this would affect game mechanics. If someone can, please enlighten me. After all, you can't cloak while locked anyway, so I think that the ones that really took a blow were the Pilgrims who warp into a belt with a few BS ratting or something and try to "WTF CLOAK", whereupon they are oblitterated. This doesn't really affect bombers too much either, assuming that you're flying a long-range fitted bomber and being smart by not warping into things with hostiles in local at 15k (the two go together IMO unless you're fighting frigs), because almost nothing can lock you at 100k+ with 1-2 best named or T2 sensor damps on them. That, and the fact that it doesn't really affect travel, because they would have to be insta-lock ships with awesome reflexes to lock you before you could cloak. Uhm, no... - Covert OPs Hunting Gatecamp - All you need is a ship smaller then a cruiser. And you need one overview setting with nothing but covert ops. As soon as you expect a covert ops to pass by you start spamming the overview (ctrl + click) where the covert ops will show up (this is very many times under a second for most pilots). There, absolutely no effort except for one overview setting and you can catch almost any covert ops pilot. Covert OPs move SLOWLY so you will definately lock during that time period, and then all it takes is a few disruptors and your target is caught =/ Hell, I'm sure a battleship with a few sensor modules could pull this off. OK, so I was wrong about the travel part.
Rajon Kelper Omacron Militia Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.08.30 03:17:00 - [30] sell your covops cloaks now while they're worth anything, geez. This takes away half the PURPOSE of covops ships. They cant be used as scouts anymore, because now they cant scout out gates, due to them having almost a 100% chance of getting popped even with cloak fitted (if a semi-fast locker is present) when jumping through a gate. wtf ccp, you've just screwed over everyone who's trained for covops. --------------------------------------------------- "The art of war is simple enough. Find out where your enemy is. Get at him as soon as you can. Strike him as hard as you can, and keep moving."

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.